Datasets:

Pavithree

/

eli5Split_55

like 0

{ "a_id": [ "c58mc10" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "You should be excited because it's a terrific confirmation of the [Standard Model](_URL_0_) of how the Universe works. The Higgs Boson was predicted to make certain aspects of the Standard Model work right. If there were *no* Higgs boson, then the Standard Model would have to be scrapped, which would be unfortunate -- it is the most precisely verified physical theory ever invented.\n\nThe prediction of the Higgs boson is similar to [James Clerk Maxwell](_URL_1_) inventing the \"[displacement current](_URL_2_)\" in the 19th century. The \"displacement current\" is a small, then-undetected aspect of electrical and magnetic theory. Even though it was too small to detect, it was needed to make certain calculations consistent. By adding the small term to the equations for electricity and magnetism, Maxwell created a wave theory of light and gave rise to Einstein's theory of relativity.\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model", "http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Clerk_Maxwell", "http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amp%C3%A8re%27s_circuital_law#Displacement_current" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d27bp0i", "d27br9h", "d27bt2d" ], "score": [ 11, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Google has an array of servers that are thousands of not millions of times faster than a single Garmin.", "Your Garmin has all the maps stored locally and does the processing locally too.\n\nGoogle Maps etc just streams the information form the internet, so all the calculations are not done on your phone, but in massive server farms that even your gaming PC can't hold up with.\n\nSo calculation speed is much faster and then the results are just brought back to your device.", "Maps/GPS often work out routes by an algorithm called \"Travelling Salesman\". All the map data is stored in a database and the app/GPS solves the Travelling Salesmen algorithm between two locations in that database. It's a mathematical problem that can be reasonably intensive to solve.\n\nGoogle maps is supported by a *huge* server farm with thousands of powerful servers. The Travelling Salesman algorithm is solved on these servers for each request and the entire operation is massively optimised.\n\nFor the Garmin, the algorithm is solved directly on the GPS device, which is often a very low powered piece of hardware in order to keep production costs down, and therefore it simply takes it much longer to solve the Travelling Salesman algorithm.\n\nIt's also possible that the Garmin software doesn't have an efficient implementation of the algorithm, or it's internal database isn't as optimised as it could be, which would all lead to delays in calculation." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dd3cwsc" ], "score": [ 9 ], "text": [ "In short the answer is volume. They do so much business with the shipper that they are given steep discounts for doing all of their shopping through their company. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dkb72j8" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Specifically in a way that doesnt go to much in depth, is activating many..many..many.. different hormonal systems in place to prepare your body to condition the physical exertion you used.\n\nA large part of this is the mitochondrial build up in muscle cells - your body is making a shitload more mitochondrion within your muscles to perform more metabolism, even in rest state (and on rest state it tries to kill some to match the metabolic need)\n\nHowever theres millions of other things going on, and pinpointing them is faulty to conceptually understand the grander scheme.\n\nYour body prepares itself to use more energy to be able to do what you did before. It conditions you, and in turn you are catabolising more actual energy even in rest state.\n\nThis is the idea behind intensive interval conditioning." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "db5xurb", "db5zz8o", "db63gyc", "db6drys" ], "score": [ 20, 3, 3, 3 ], "text": [ "Because they can.\n\nFor a gas station with electronic signage, there is almost no upfront cost in changing the price that gas is being sold at. Unlike many commodities where physical paper signs must be changed (where the cost of labor discourages frequent small changes.).\n\nGas is a commodity with an inflexible demand. If you need gas on a particular day, there's not much you can do except buy gas from someone, which leads to\n\nCompetition between nearby gas stations. Many major gas stations are in close proximity to another. As the product they sell is virtually the same thing, a price war often ensues: with each gas station trying to win over customers, while avoiding hurting their profit margin too much. \n\nAlso, because of near-daily price adjustments over the past few years, customers have come to expect in accept it. A coffee shop or a grocery store would likely draw intense feedback if they started adjusting prices frequently.", "Because consumers can very easily shop for cheaper gas. You are in your car, the prices are right there on a giant sign, it is the easiest thing in the world to drive an extra block to a cheaper station. So gas stations have to compete to the last penny.\n\nCompare that to going into a coffee shop. You don't immediately know how much it costs vs. the competition, and even if you did, you are already there, and it isn't worth the bother to save a quarter.", "Another factor besides those mentioned is the relatively small markup on a gallon of gas (average: less than 20 cents/gallon with less than 5 cents turning into profit after costs). The retailer has to constantly change prices in order to be competitive and the difference of a nickel/gallon can be the difference between losing & making money.\n\nCommodities like coffee have a much larger markup relative to the actual price of the materials. Consumer products like cokes & chips have a much larger markup as well. Many gas stations sell gas in the hope of attracting customers who might then spend money on something inside with a larger margin.", "They do. You can get up to the second fresh prices on gold, and coffee beans, etc. People trade with these things, just like stocks.\n\nBut you, as a typical consumer, are not buying those commodities. You are buying a service and/or a refined product. A cup of coffee at a coffee shop is more than just the cup of coffee: it is the ambiance of the place, the staff's wages, etc. It's all the things that makes you prefer buying it at coffee shop X rather than at their competitor Y. Either way, you know you are paying for significantly more than just the cup of coffee (as anyone who makes their own cup of morning coffee at home will tell you).\n\nGasoline is of course also a refined product (very literally, even). However, since there is exactly no difference what so ever between the gas that you get at one brand of gas station vs. another, and the experience of pumping gas is horrible and smelly everywhere you go, gas stations compete almost entirely on price. What actually makes them money is the store, where the markup on a Snickers bar is significantly better than what they can get for the gas. In fact, they can often tolerate selling gas at a slight loss, just to get you into the store. \n\nVirtually nobody says to themselves: \"the hot dogs and soft drinks are cheaper at station X, so I'll go there instead of at Y, where the gas is evidently cheaper, as it says on the big sign\". So that's how they get you." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cns59n4", "cns6rni" ], "score": [ 9, 3 ], "text": [ "Kids don't understand physical limitations or impossibilities. They're more creative because they don't consider what they can't do, just what they want. ", "It's a type of learning mechanism.\n\nPeek-a-boo is about object permanence. When kids like to play that is when they're just developing the ability to realize that objects still exist even when they currently can't see them.\n\nWhen they've learned it, they get bored by it and it's no longer funny/interesting.\n\nGood play is learning. Science can happen.\n\n_URL_0_\n\nTry showing her some of those and see what happens." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "https://www.youtube.com/user/itsokaytobesmart/videos" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d6qfx62" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ " > ELI5: how light travels in a particle and a wave.\n\nThat's one of the really great unexplained questions in physics. It's quite possible that we'll never truly be able to fully understand what a photon \"is\" because it's so far beyond anything the human brain actually experiences.\n\nHowever we can describe with extreme mathematical precision how a photon behaves. And it just turns out that in some circumstances it behaves *exactly* like a particle would, and in other circumstances it behaves *exactly* like a wave would.\n\nSo it's not a particle or a wave. It's a ... well, it's a photon. You can use analogies to describe its behaviour in a given set of circumstances but you have to constantly remember that they're just analogies, not actual descriptions of the real photon." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cejenfa" ], "score": [ 7 ], "text": [ "Because marked money can be tracked, sequential bills can be tracked. \n\nIn the case of the Lindbergh baby they wrote down the serial numbers of the bills and used them to track down the kidnapper/killer. \n\nSo lets say you kidnap someone and they pay the ransom. They keep an eye out for the bills they marked and notice them at a McDonalds, a Walmart and a Carwash. They know the area you've been in and now they can narrow it down to people who have been at these three locations in a specific time frame. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cfbhh1r" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Oils from your skin break the surface tension of the bubbles, and they just dissolve. It works with soda also." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cy9b3f6", "cy9cfbm" ], "score": [ 8, 2 ], "text": [ "There is an emotion called *schadenfreude* which means taking joy in other people's suffering. Some people are mildly sadistic and like to annoy others; it gives them a sense of power that might compensate for some bad feelings or lack of self-worth they are experiencing.", "Have you ever solved a math problem before the rest of the class? You can sit there and wait for them to get it but sometimes people feel the need to blurt out the answer. It could be for attention, the false hope of praise, unintentional, they are impatient that others haven't gotten it, or maybe they just like being a dick." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "f1b9hv4", "f1b9i7i" ], "score": [ 12, 84 ], "text": [ "The really simple answer is that muscles are effectively made to be torn and damaged to regrow stronger. They're constantly getting minor \"damage\" as you use them, so major damage doesn't take too long to regenerate.\n\nLigaments and tendons can't really regenerate. You either have a partial tear - in which case, the ligaments/tendons don't regenerate, just form scar tissue which doesn't have the same functionality as the usual tendon tissue. Or you have a complete tear, and the body can't fix it on it's own, and you have to have surgical fixes.", "The blood flow to ligaments and tendons is far, far lower than to the muscles. This means any growth and or repair is much slower, as the blood carries the vital clotting factors etc needed in the healing process.\n\nThe problem arises because the muscles are capable of generating much more force than the ligaments and tendons can withstand - that asymmetry can be dangerous when doing too much too soon. Getting strong muscles is relatively fast, strong ligaments and tendons take years to build up strength - and even longer to repair." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ckpqkzv" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Your body thinks you're losing balance and your defensive instincts or 'flight or fight response' kicks in to keep you unhurt." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cujla3f", "cujmrif" ], "score": [ 11, 4 ], "text": [ "Quantum entanglement, or 'spooky action at a distance', is a phenomenon that can occur when two particles are created. I'll use spin as an example of a property that can be entangled. If two particles are created that are entangled, their spins will have opposite values. You can only know the probability that a particle's spin will be in a particular direction. There's no way to be sure ahead of time.\n\nSay you measure the spin of one entangled particle to be clockwise. You now instantly know that the particle it is entangled with has a counterclockwise spin. Even though it's impossible to describe spin as anything other than a probability, the spin of the second particle is determined by the measurement of the first particle. Whatever measurement you get, the other entangled particle will measure the opposite way.\n\nThe second particle 'knowing' which spin to have based on the first particle's measurement happens instantaneously, and this bothered Einstein, the man who first referred to it as \"spooky\". According to relativity, nothing can move faster than the speed of light. Yet, the second particle's spin is determined instantly. Theoretically, the particles could be separated by light years, and measuring clockwise on the first particle's spin would guarantee that the second particle's spin would be counterclockwise.\n\nThis doesn't violate relativity, however, because there is no way to transmit information via entanglement. The second particle's measured quantity will always be determined by the measurement of the first particle, but what that measurement yields is inherently probabilistic. It's random, and the qualities of the second particle will be random too, just in the opposite way. So no physical laws are broken. You can't use quantum entanglement to send a message or intentionally make anything at all happen. And it's something that only really matters on the scale of individual particles. The chances of your left big toe being entangled with your right are about as likely as Jupiter spontaneously appearing in the Andromeda galaxy. It's technically possible, but the odds are so small that they're barely quantifiable.\n\nWhat does this mean for general physics? Nothing, because we've been aware of entanglement for quite some time now. All that has happened is that yet another rigorous experiment has upheld it to be true.\n\nAs an aside, Einstein's resolution to the problem was to say that the two particles contained hidden variables that determined what state they'd be in when measured. He had no evidence, but he imagined that there were some things that we just didn't yet know about the particles that would cause them to measure in opposite ways. The measurement of the first didn't determine the second because, to him, the information about what the measurements would be was contained within the particles all along, unknown to us. Many experiments have shown this to be false; quantum entanglement has withstood all experiments to date. Look up Bell's Inequalities if you want to know how we can prove that there are no hidden variables.", "By the way, this is the lab who did the research and the experiment. \n\n_URL_0_\n\nI am an engineer in that lab, work never feels like work just one science playground " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "Www.Qutech.nl" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "edcys4w", "edd12zq" ], "score": [ 2, 4 ], "text": [ "I think what is happening is the oil gives off a tiny bit of heat when it evaporates from the rag. Now by itself, that is no big deal. \n\nBUT, if you have ten or twenty or fifty of these rags jammed into a can or box or whatever, that tiny bit of heat, all insulated by the other rags, can build up, and the more heat builds up, then the more oil evaporates, until it becomes a runaway chain reaction and eventually catches fire. \n\nCoal jammed into a bunker on a ship can suffer the same fate.", "BLO polymerizes as it dries (hardens/crosslinks) and that process generates heat. Under the right conditions it can (and will, I've seen the aftermath) get hot enough to ignite.\n\nIf you want to reproduce an exothermic reaction in a controlled way, squirt some superglue on it paper towel. The surface area of the fibers allows the cyanoacrylate to set quickly and the paper gets very hot for a few seconds. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cfppvul" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "The 'hairs' on their feet are incredibly tiny and there is a huge amount of them. The hairs are so small that they are able to interact with the surface on an atomic level. The gecko sticks to glass using something called Van der Waal forces, which is the attraction between two near by atoms. The attraction isn't a bond, it works in a way similar to magnets. Basically, they gecko's foot has < huge number > of hairs and each one is working like a tiny magnet with the atoms in the glass." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cxp5e3p", "cxp6271", "cxp62fj", "cxp6wd4", "cxp82s9", "cxp8q8h", "cxp8qz3", "cxp8ulx", "cxpa6pz", "cxpa9pu", "cxpg285", "cxptoqf" ], "score": [ 15, 2, 96, 23, 13, 38, 45, 5, 2, 6, 3, 5 ], "text": [ "Who were they stolen from? A \"country\" didn't own them at the time they were removed from Egypt. If there was a specific *family* that had previously had ownership of them and wanted to claim them back, there would be specific procedures that they could take legally , but \"Egypt\" as an entity, doesn't have such a claim.", "The simple answer is that Egypt can take anything it wants from any country that it can over power militarily. The British have a military force that is quite capable of repelling the Egyptian military from an attack on the British home island.\n\nSo the Egyptians will have to use other means (i.e., diplomacy) to get their artifacts back.", "They can't \"take them back\". I mean, they can't just march into the British museum and take them, right? They'd pretty much be arrested. \n\nThey can *request* the artifacts be returned -- and the have -- but the British Museum (and government) would have to decide to actually do it. So far, they have not. But Egypt (and Greece, and India, and any other country that claims that Britain holds artifacts that belong to them) don't really have much of a legal recourse, let alone the physical power it would take to force the issue. ", "The Muslim leaders of Egypt ordered many artifacts destroyed for being idols. The artifacts are better off in UK and Egypt may not even want them.", "In previous centuries, antiquities were often sold by government officials in Egypt, Greece, etc. to European countries as part of some kind of political deal, so they weren't always flat-out stolen, although of course you can claim that the government officials never had the right to sell them", "Almost none were stolen. Many were exported in 19th century with agreement of Egyptian government. Many were sold by the Egyptian government: the national museum had a 'shop' where you could buy pretty much anything that came out of the ground or a tomb. MAny excavations since have had deals where finds are shared. Obviously some stuff was actually stolen, but that happens everywhere, and museums are pretty reluctant to exhibit stuff if they arent sure where it came from. Same goes for Greece, BTW.", "There's an argument to be made that these artifacts aren't owned by any nation, Egypt or Britain, but are instead owned by *humanity*. In that context, Britain is a far better choice to look after these artifacts as they have so far done an excellent job keeping them in as good a condition as possible while simultaneously exhibiting them for public viewing and enjoyment. It is in *humanities* best interests that they stay where they are, even if that may not be in the best interests of modern day Egypt. And at this point modern Egyptians are hugely different ethnically than those who produced these artifacts, so the claim cannot be made by modern Egyptians that it is the work of their ancestors.", "The British museum would be completely empty if they gave back anything. They can't start the precedent of giving stolen artifacts away unless they're willing to do it for everyone. Which will Never happen. David Cameron has basically said fuck off to India about the big diamond that's in the Crown Jewels. ", "If an alien nation occupied France and pushed the French people out, would the new residents have the right to demand ancient French artefacts be returned to their original locations?", "They (and other countries like Greece, where large numbers of antiquities were shipped abroad and now reside in foreign museums) *have* requested their artifacts back at times. In fact, just before the revolution, they were trying to request the famous Nefertiti bust in Berlin. The short answer is that short of force, they don't have a great chance of getting them back. In some cases, the return of antiquities *might* be part of negotiations around some larger issue, but these countries generally have bigger concerns.\n\nFrom the perspective of the countries/institutions that currently *have* the antiquities and artifacts, they have little motivation to give them back. Additionally, if the artifacts would go back to a country that's unstable or has poor infrastructure/funding available, researchers may be concerned that the artifacts will not be properly cared for (some need continual restorations/upkeep or have to be kept in very specific conditions to preserve them) - or they're worried about the items being sold or otherwise lost via corruption or instability. Sadly, this fear isn't totally unfounded - during the Egyptian revolution, some artifacts *were* stolen from the Egyptian Museum in Cairo.\n", "A lot of artifacts that came out of China are, afaik, stolen. This is true for many things, such as urns, and ceramics. Some were stolen through the opium wars, such as when the Anglo-French coalition force burned the Emperor's Summer Palace. \n\nThat being said, many artifacts were probably preserved due to being stolen. In the Cultural Revolution for example, Mao moved the people to destroy many relics of the past. Of course, being kept on display in other countries means that people from the lands that produced them can't access them anyways. ", "The government and culture that made them no longer exists. Those artifacts are global property and global heritage. They were not stolen, they were excavated by the British. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cbcyzxl" ], "score": [ 7 ], "text": [ "There are two factors at work here:\n\nOne is **common ancestry**. All living things share a fairly small set of common ancestors. Living things that are more closely related to one another share a more recent common ancestor than things that are less closely related to one another. For example, chimpanzees and gorillas share a more recent common ancestor with each other than either does with (for example) beetles.\n\nIn some cases, common body parts or functions are inherited from common ancestors. This is likely what we see in the opposable thumbs of chimpanzees and gorillas (for instance).\n\nIt's also possible to have **convergent evolution**. In the case of convergent evolution, the same features arises independently in separate lineages. This can happen by chance, and/or because a certain adaptation is very favorable. For example, flight in dragonflies and bats arose independently. We know this is the case because the structures responsible for flight are different in each, and the genes responsible for encoding those structures are considerable different in each.\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "crtmrib" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "The answer to the second question is yes. Some animals will not remember humans because it is not a part they have required in their brains.\n\nThat being said, those that do remember humans have a number of ways similar to our own senses, but on a more advanced level. There are a lot of different ways animals remember people, but the most common are through scent, sound, and sight. While we can't tell ourselves, we have a unique scent to some animals. We sound unique as well to some animals. Visually, our mannerisms and physical features are also recognizable. Animals can also make memories like we can. Some animals will have bad memories of a person and will react so when around them. Like humans, animals also have an emotional response when they recognize someone they're familiar with. They have reactions to seeing, smelling, or hearing a familiar sight, scent, or voice just like we do to other humans." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ckk7wz7", "ckk9v13" ], "score": [ 10, 4 ], "text": [ "First, your prof misspoke a little...he should have said *complex* numbers can be used as ordered pair.\n\nAll complex numbers are in the form *a + bi*, and it is sometimes useful to treat them as the ordered pair (*a*, *b*). When *a* = 0, you have an imaginary number in the form (0, *b*), and when *b* = 0, you have a real. ", "Using complex numbers allows you to essentially add a dimension, the i or imaginary dimension. When you use a complex number it is like having a 2D plane instead of a 1D number line. In order to map that 2D plane, you need 2 numbers instead of 1, hence the ordered pairs." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e255bu1" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "There isn't one \"standard\" Judaism. There are 3 main branches - reform, conservative, orthodox. They differ on how strictly they follow the religion and how they observe. Reform are the most lax and have somewhat adopted practices of some Christian sects, such as musical instruments and choruses in services. They are also least likely to keep kosher, follow the sabath strictly, etc. Conservative are more tradition in service and more mixed in practice, ie. some don't keep kosher and only attend services on high holidays while others go to weekly services, keep kosher, observe parts of the sabbath rituals (maybe they don't drive, choosing to walk to temple). Orthodox follow the religion the most strictly, observing the sabbath and attending temple regularly, keeping kosher, modesty in dress, etc. But even within the Orthodox community there are different levels of custom/practice that often grew out of their originating community back in Europe or the Middle East and affect things like things like dress, assimilation with the general community outside orthodox Judaism. Because Hasidism arose in Eastern Europe, they tend to dress a certain way, speak Yiddish. And there are also certain practices and religious emphasis that's slightly different than other orthodox groups." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c7i104c", "c7i1d3d", "c7i1jna", "c7i2uut", "c7id0zq" ], "score": [ 3, 19, 2, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Why would we want to? Rectangles are more space efficient.", "Because they aren't very efficient.\n\nLets say we use modern construction techniques and fill a pyramid with 'rooms' people would wanna live in. (I make this assumption because making a tomb that big for just one person anymore is silly on the face of it)\n\nSo now we have a 'use' for a pyramid. Lets say you are in a big city and you want to build an apartment complex or a house or something. So you buy up a city block, knock down the old square apartment building that had a foot print of 500m by 500m.\n\nNow you are gonna build your pyramid apartment in that spot. you decide you want the slope of the sides to be 45 degrees, which means the height of your building is at most 250m tall, which is fine.\n\nNow you realize that the volume of your pyramid (which represents the amount of space people can use) is 20,833,333.33 m^3. Which sounds like a lot untill it is compared to an equivalent 500x500x250 cube appartment which gets three times as much space with 62,500,000 m^3.\n\nBut wait it gets better. If you have a 6 foot tall person in a room with a 45 degree slope to one of the walls, there will be six feet of 'floor space' away from the wall in which they cannot stand without crouching. Given that the average room in an apartment is something like 12x12 that is approximately half of every room in every apartment which a slightly above averaged height person cannot access.\n\nDoing some very bad math this implies that of the 20,833,333.33 m^3 of total 'apartment space' in your building only a further fraction of that would be usable.\n\nYou can solve this problem by making the walls 'steeper' but even then that increases the instability of your building, and kinda ruins the whole 'pyramid' vibe in the first place.\n\nSo there you have it, rectangular faced buildings are more efficient both in absolute amount of space, and amount of usable space, and lets face it, if you aren't making your building out of giant rocks (which further limits the amount of space) It probably isn't going to make it hangout of that much longer 'long term' anyway.\n\n(fun fact) the tallest building in the world is 829.8 m. If this were a pyramid with a 45 degree slope to its sides it would cover approximately 2.75 square kilometers with its base.\n\nThis represents over 3% of the total area of manhattan. Which if it were located in it would displace over 50k people.", "The buildings we design and build today are chosen based on a mix of durability, the resources we have available, ease of construction, and of course their intended use. The reason we don't build pyramids is because, first, they're less efficient in terms of space; we typically make better use out of cuboids and other variants with ninety-degree angles between walls and floors. Plus, we can stack rectangular (again, cuboid) buildings closer together and take advantage of large heights; pyramids loose a great deal of space \"above\" that a skyscraper could contain.\n\nAs to why we don't make classical stone pyramids, the answer is in what it takes to carve and move stone; yes, they endure, and may endure longer then our glass-and-steel constructs (long story; skyscrapers need maintenance), but the time and effort it would take to build one compared to the value we would get out of it makes them less valuable.\n\nOn the other hand, we *do* build pyramids (of modern materials) for ascetic reasons - a partial list [can be found here](_URL_3_), but just to point out the most notable examples:\n\n* [The Lourve](_URL_0_) in Paris is an art and antiquities museum which has this modern component added to its otherwise quite classical architecture (French Renaissance, if I undertand correctly), and the glass pyramid acts as the main entrance.\n* [The Luxor Hotel](_URL_1_) in Las Vegas takes the form of a pyramid; this is for aesthetics and to attract clientele. To phrase it another way, it's flashy and eye-catching, and thus attracts guests. And let's face it; to be eye-catching in Vegas...\n* The [Pyramid Arena](_URL_2_) in Memphis, Tennessee. In addition to the pure aesthetic value (let's face it; in all these examples it's cool to have a pyramid), it also ties into the city - Memphis is named after an [ancient Egyptian city](_URL_4_) famous for its pyramids.", "Ancient cultures built pyramids because they're the easiest shape to build. Now that we are better and building things and can build rectangular skyscrapers, we don't need pyramids anymore.", "We prefer phallic imagery over mammary imagery ^^^^^jokeanswer" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louvre_Pyramid", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxor_Hotel", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_Arena", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid#Modern_pyramids", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memphis,_Egypt" ], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ceug7o2" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "The depreciation of value of Thailand's currency combined with the lack of financial policy to handle the event is the starting point. Thailand and some other countries had fixed or semi-fixed currency exchange rates which contributed to deficits in value and, in turn, the value investors placed on those currencies. Domestic companies with loans in foreign currencies found themselves needing to pay more money for the same loan amount due to the decline in value of the currency. Panic ensued in the markets and the rest is history. \n\nTL;DR - too much risk in the currency exchanges without protective policies allowed bad investments which caused massive sell-offs. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d7g1qyl", "d7g2snz", "d7g3jim" ], "score": [ 8, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "I believe that what they mean is that more surface area in *total* is exposed, increasing the reaction rate. \n \nSay you have a perfect sphere, submerged in liquid. Right now, the area exposed to the liquid is the surface area of the sphere. \n \nNow say you cut the sphere in half. Now, the area exposed is equal to the surface area of the original sphere, *plus* the two circular faces which you have just created by cutting the sphere into halves. Does that make sense?", "A really easy everyday example of that principle in action is a loaf of bread. The outside of the bread is the surface area. Now cut the loaf into slices. You still have all that outside surface area but now the front and back of each slice is also surface area. You've cut it into smaller pieces and massively increased the surface area. \n\nTL:DR - cutting something up turns some of the inside into surface area too. ", "Reducing the size of an object does not increase it's surface area. When you cut an object into pieces, you are creating multiple objects. Rather than jumping into surface area, I'll explain with perimeter, since I feel like that's easier to understand. Imagine you have a 2x4 inch rectangle. There's 2 2-inch sides and 2 4-inch sides. The total perimeter is 2+2+4+4= 12 inches. Now split the rectangle apart into 2 2x2 squares. Each square has 4 2-inch sides. So the total perimeter of both squares is 2x(2+2+2+2) = 16 inches. \n\nWhen you split apart an object, you're creating at least two new faces. One on the outside of each object. These new faces get added in when calculating the total surface area. So a 2x2x4 rectangular prism with total surface area of 2(2x2)+4(2x4)=40 inches^2 can become two cubes with a combined surface area of 2(6(2x2))=48 inches^2 ." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cftczo7", "cftd57v" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "In general, cops don't want to be recorded while working as if they make a mistake or push the boundary too far, it can bite them in the ass later. \n\nI'm not sure what your job is, but how would you feel if every action you took in a dangerous situation was scrutinized? Sometimes things aren't always black and white, and actions in a grey area can result in you getting fired. Video doesn't always show things in the correct context and can make things appear to be worse than they are. For example, a video shows a cop attacking a suspect. Was he abusing his power, or was he trying to protect himself and subdue an armed and violent individual?\n\nThat said, there are also cops that flat out break the law and hide behind the badge, these cops don't want to be recorded at all as it would be impossible to justify their actions.", "In some jurisdictions, it *isn't* always legal to record police officers. It's relatively new for most people to even have the ability to do this, so not all officers are super well trained on what the law is." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c2cgsy1", "c2cje0c", "c2cgsy1", "c2cje0c" ], "score": [ 26, 2, 26, 2 ], "text": [ "The plane is pushed forward by either propellers or jet engines. Propellers work just like a fan and push air backwards. Jet engines also push air backwards, but push much harder. This is why Jets can go faster.\n\nThe wings on the plane are tipped a little bit so that as the plane is moving forwards, they push the air down. Pushing the air down pushes the plane up and keeps it in the air.\n\nYou can feel this for yourself in a car. If you hold your hand out the window while driving and tilt it a little, you will see that it is either pushed up or down depending on how it is tipped!\n\nSource: My 5 year old daughter asked me this question a few weeks ago.", "Much like your hand out a car window. Almost exactly. \n\nAs your hand moves through the air, if you tilt the front edge up slightly your hand will rise because air is hitting the underside of it more, pushing it up. IF you tilt it down, the opposite. This tilting is called 'Angle of Attack'.\n\nThis is basically how wings work (il5 explanation). So put 2 wings on either side of a plane, make it move fast enough forward through the air (with and propeller/jet engines), tilt the wings back slightly and they'll rise up, pulling the plane with them.\n\n\nThe wings also have a special shape (airfoil) which cause a slight amount of lift themselves, but negligible in contrast to the angle of attack. Most people will try and give you this explanation (about airfoil) but it's not entirely correct (to the point of being not worth talking about), and only a (very small) part reason what planes fly. A plane will still fly without any airfoil, but will not fly without air moving over the wings.", "The plane is pushed forward by either propellers or jet engines. Propellers work just like a fan and push air backwards. Jet engines also push air backwards, but push much harder. This is why Jets can go faster.\n\nThe wings on the plane are tipped a little bit so that as the plane is moving forwards, they push the air down. Pushing the air down pushes the plane up and keeps it in the air.\n\nYou can feel this for yourself in a car. If you hold your hand out the window while driving and tilt it a little, you will see that it is either pushed up or down depending on how it is tipped!\n\nSource: My 5 year old daughter asked me this question a few weeks ago.", "Much like your hand out a car window. Almost exactly. \n\nAs your hand moves through the air, if you tilt the front edge up slightly your hand will rise because air is hitting the underside of it more, pushing it up. IF you tilt it down, the opposite. This tilting is called 'Angle of Attack'.\n\nThis is basically how wings work (il5 explanation). So put 2 wings on either side of a plane, make it move fast enough forward through the air (with and propeller/jet engines), tilt the wings back slightly and they'll rise up, pulling the plane with them.\n\n\nThe wings also have a special shape (airfoil) which cause a slight amount of lift themselves, but negligible in contrast to the angle of attack. Most people will try and give you this explanation (about airfoil) but it's not entirely correct (to the point of being not worth talking about), and only a (very small) part reason what planes fly. A plane will still fly without any airfoil, but will not fly without air moving over the wings." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cvmolgc", "cvmpft5", "cvmw34b", "cvn1rq0" ], "score": [ 139, 41, 8, 4 ], "text": [ "If a good hacker didn't leave a footprint then the company wouldn't know about the leak, and you would never hear about the company having a leak.\n\nThe Sony hack wasn't noticed by Sony. It was the hacker group that publicly exposed the hack.", "So. I worked in a global company when it was hacked. It was during a nuclear plant being built, and some of the foreign investors turned out to be part of there countries intelligence services. While they were being shown around, one of them put a pen drive in a USB port of one of our computors.\n\nA week later nobody really noticed anything. A few more spam emails got through the firewall, but nothing major. But then, I got an out of office reply from someone I'd not sent an email too. I looked into it, and the service desk was getting a few calls like this. Weird. Then I was sending an email, and wanted to recall it, looked in my sent items and a whole list of unknown emails were there. Again the serivce desk looked into it, locked down my email address and called in help. There was a program in the email system for a month (since the pen drive was inserted) that had propigated slowly from that one PC, to all the PCs it emailed, and onwards. All it did was send a copy of the emails from infected PCs onwards, it wasn't really possible to track how or where as it sent thousands of dummy mails everywhere. They assume the aim was to get a copy of directors discussing commercial issues etc, which they certainly will have managed.", "Network intrusion and detection tools (along with people reading the reports) can catch things. Some of those tools monitor real time, some produce daily/weekly reports and that is when you find things. Something as simple as a virus on your computer they gets found by a definition update to your antivirus and you can figure out when it was installed/changed last. Which might be several days ago. \n\nBut yes, lots of times companies don't know they were hacked or the extent of the hack until.... \n\nHacking data isn't generally done for fun. It's criminal and can land you in a lot of shit if you do it badly. Hackers who can get data and get away with it are worth a lot of money, and they expect to be paid, extortion of the hacked company, bank or cc fraud (usually they sell this data to other hackers who specialize in this sort of thing). So hacked data to be worth anything shows up on hacker websites fairly quickly, or is used for extortion fairly quickly. And once you know what was taken (even part of it) you can work back through logs and see what was accessed from where and know the extent of the hack (not necessarily the real origin though). ", "When they find their shit on bittorrent 2 years after the fact, most commonly. If you don't catch it real-time (using IDS equipment and good monitoring practices as explained in other posts), you basically have to get lucky to find it.\n\nBelgacom BICS found out GCHQ hacked them because their Exchange server was continuously crashing, because of a bug in the malware they planted in there. That bug was fixed in other versions of the same malware they found in other places of the network." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d1x6quq", "d1x6sbh", "d1x8kfw", "d1x983a", "d1x9f2i", "d1xbhza" ], "score": [ 4, 9, 15, 3, 5, 7 ], "text": [ "By scaring the shit out of all the drivers around you so that *they* have to pay close attention to their driving. And thank their lucky stars that at least you aren't eating a donut.", "Cars are designed by people to be easily driven by people. Learning how to drive isn't any different than learning any other skill.", "Your brain does operations in parallel. Just because your thinking about something, doesn't mean your brain isn't thinking about something else. Like keeping your heart working, breathing, and motor skills that you don't need to think too hard to do anymore.", "Your brain is evolved to watch out for dangers while your mind \"wanders into oblivion\". There isn't such a big difference between watching out for traffic and watching out for snakes or lions.", "In the same manner as you can walk and chew gum at the same time - for most (all?) learned skills during learning, the various parts of your brain develop connections that are, in essence, a 'neural net' engine that does those things - usually, with no conscious processes required, those connections generally are not accessible to the small part of your brain that \"runs\" consciousness.\n\nThe part of your mind that is able to wander into oblivion and thoughts about sex isn't able to drive a car anyway. It has limited throughput and that is not sufficient to handle all the tasks required. It shows up quite nicely as people learn to drive - first, they consciously manipulate the pedals and steering wheel and are unable to do anything else beyond that such as paying attention to traffic lights and mirrors; and even the actual task of pressing the pedal to the exact desired amount is done quite poorly. With some time, that (part of) task gets learned and can be done \"automatically\" with the conscious mind merely initiating the process.\n\nAfter some more time, the other, more complex parts go the same way up to the extent that (some?) people occasionally can drive home without even consciously acknowledging and paying attention to the process, much less having their conscious mind actually making any decisions about the details of that trip..", "Part of it is to do with different memory types. Driving, like riding a bike, is largely procedural, i.e. its doing something. Unlike episodic memory (things that have happened to you or matter, events/people) etc, its implicit. Which means its not something you're aware of really, you don't 'remember' how to ride a bike in the same way you remember that sex you had once. Its not an active process, kinda like muscle memory, where you simply draw on that memory to use it. So you drive almost on automatic, and can think about other things. At the same time, part of your attention is still engaged by driving and we have finite attention, so the less attention you pay to driving, the more likely you are to have an accident." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d4crjfz" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "Pure HTML is whitespace-insensitive. That means that all blank space, except for a single space between words, is ignored. This is convenient from a developer point of view, because it means you can space your markup for easy editing without breaking the appearance of the page.\n\nComment systems, like the one on reddit, use different formatting languages. These languages are more WYSIWIG, which is intuitive, but less flexible." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e39b1ua" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "The effect chewing gum has on the teeth really depends on the type of gum you are chewing. If the gum contains sugar, it might create an opportunity for bacteria on the teeth to multiply and cause tooth decay. However, just as with other forms of tooth decay, these harmful effects can be counteracted by brushing the teeth well. On the other hand, chewing sugarfree gum has been shown to increase the production of saliva in the mouth, which helps to wash away remains of food from between the teeth. Thus, eating sugarfree gum can actually help prevent tooth decay. \n\nEffects on the brain haven't been studied very much yet (as far as I know). However, a recent study (_URL_0_) did show that concentration might be increased up to 10% while chewing gum. No significant increases in other brain functionality were discovered in this study." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19356310/" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "etfadox", "etfam2k", "etfavhg", "etfcodj" ], "score": [ 25, 17, 4, 2 ], "text": [ "It’s the part of your nervous system that protects you when you’re in danger. Your body is designed to run away from tigers and such, not take tests or speak in public. Having your heart rate go up and moving your blood to different parts of the body is useful when fighting a wild animal but not as useful when you’re sitting in a desk - so it just makes you hot and sweaty.", "Fight-or-flight response.\n\nBack in the 'caveman days' (not exactly an accurate term but a useful approximation), most encounters that would make a human feel what we now call 'nervous' would be something solved by violence or getting the heck outta there.\n\nBasically, your body is pre-gaming for a fight or for running away, because that's what 'nervous' means to it. It doesn't understand concepts like \"mid-terms\" and \"job interviews\" that can't be solved by running away or stabbing with a spear.\n\nYou get hot and sweaty due to increased blood flow, which is making sure your muscles are well-fed and have plenty of oxygen so they can operate at their best once the expected fight or flight starts. The sweat can also be preparedness on it's own; if you're already sweating when the action starts then it can start cooling you off faster.", "Because in nature if you are getting nervous it means shits about to hit the fan, so body is getting you ready to book it at your max speed or fight what ever is making You nervous. \n\nTo do that it starts producing more energy to help you to do it. Heating is effect of that, same way car engine gets hot when it is working, and sweat response to your heat, its to make sure you dont overheat", "besides increasing your oxygen levels(breathing techniques), what can help you control this response?" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e8iewd2", "e8iewzw", "e8iexvn" ], "score": [ 9, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "The left and right tracks turn at different speeds. The engines have enough strength (torque) that they'll scrape across the ground as they rotate ", "One turns forwards, the other turns backward (or just forward but slower), creating a spinning motion.", "The two sets of tracks can be controlled separately, so to turn, you just spin one set of tracks faster than the other. IIRC, older tanks had two levers you could use to adjust the speed of the two tracks. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ccoc5jn", "ccoc9ho", "ccodotn", "ccoe3m4" ], "score": [ 6, 2, 4, 9 ], "text": [ "The pipes are in the wall, and the water comes from beneath the house, so it is not efficient to pump the water any higher than necessary.\n\nThe way buildings are made today, there is usually a limited number of \"water walls\" that are slightly thicker than other walls to accommodate water pipes, and to have as many water fixtures on that wall as possible. This is why kitchens, bathrooms and laundry rooms often border each other, or are directly above or below each other in a multi-floor building.", "It costs more money to bring it that high. Plus, most people cant reach that high....", "Mine comes from the ceiling. I built it myself.", "The plumbing is a lot easier to do in the wall, so comes from there, unless you want to pay a premium for a ceiling head." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "csheb41", "cshee6p" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Because all the ones we know about are really far away and shrouded in tons of gas and dust making them camoflouged.\n\nWe have xray images of the blackhole at the center of our galaxy, but they are only xrays. You can't really tell too much of what's going on.", "Well we aren't close enough to any black holes to see a good 'disc of blackness' and it's worth noting space is pretty dark anyway, so it'd be hard to make out at the best of times. Would you notice if Jupiter was actually a black spot in the sky? Not easily, and it's a bigger disk than a distant event horizon would provide us. Most images of black holes involve extremely bright regions seen at great distance, due to the fact that the matter accreting around them gets very hot and shoots out a lot of high energy to our receivers. If there isn't matter around them, giving us a clear shot, well, they are really hard to find." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d1fgu0g", "d1fh8vn" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "Sound is the vibration of air particles. Taking to in a room is like standing in a swimming pool and splashing around, everybody gets wet. \n\nDirectional speakers are more like you holding one end of a slinky, and your friend holding the other, you can shake the slinky forwards and backwards as much as you want, but your other friend stood off to the sound won't feel anything.", "It has to do with something called \"phase interference.\" Say you have \"point\" sources, meaning a sound wave is generated at a single point and expands omnidirectionally (in a sphere) from both points. If those two sources are located some distance from each other and generate the same wave, there is an interference pattern due to the fact that they create waves that are slightly out of phase, because there is a delay between the waves from each point source. When the waves from each source are 180^o out of phase (the time delay for that depends on frequency) you get total cancellation. \n\nNow a loudspeaker is modeled as a point source. You can get very crafty and put a bunch of speakers into an \"array\" (a 1-D array is a \"line array\" all speakers are aligned along a single axis, a 2-D array is usually a circle or square, a 3-D array can be a sphere). Then what you do is delay the same signal feeding each point source by differing amounts, doing so creates controllable interference pattern. You can make this pattern a \"beam.\" \n\nThat's sort of the way they can make a speaker array directional, it's used by the military to make sound spotlights where they blast loud noise at a concentrated area without anyone outside hearing it. You also see it in museums and other places where walking into the beam let's you hear the sound, but then you walk out and it's gone. \n\nThe same is true in reverse, you can make microphone arrays that do the same thing. Except you can get even craftier with mics and get multiple beams from one array. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dl03raa" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "I was actually thinking about this the other day because I'm the kind of person seems to never get comfortable. I found out if you stretch and loosen up your muscles you'll have an easier time sitting still or even falling asleep at night." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "do4ed6o" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "See my earlier answer to your removed thread:\n\nPuerto Rico held four recent referendums to establish whether the population wanted a change in status. Until recently, the vote was either only narrowly in favour of statehood, or favoured remaining as-is.\n\nThe referendum held in 2012 showed 54% in favour of statehood, but 500,000 blank ballots were included in the numbers, and so Congress ignored the vote.\n\nIn the most recent one (2017), 97% of voters voted in favour of PR becoming a state. However turnout was low (23%) and so it was also ignored. The governor of Puerto Rico is now in favour of remaining an unincorporated territory, for economical, political and identity reasons.\n\nFor a history of why PR is part of the USA - you can blame the USA for occupying PR during the Spanish-American war in 1898.\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d3e3m7y" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "There isn't really a storyline to Dark Souls. \n\n[Here](_URL_0_) is a video explaining a bit more." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "https://youtu.be/LueVmefY_Kg" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cvcyuju", "cvcz2k4", "cvd1bot" ], "score": [ 6, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "In our evolutionary history, spotting patterns was very advantageous. In fact, it was much better to spot a pattern when none existed than to not spot one that did exist. Consequently, people who were good at spotting patterns were more likely to survive and have children, and everyone became good at spotting patterns when none existed.\n\nThe Zodiac is just like that. \n\nIt also operates by using very vague descriptions that could apply to many people. For example, here is my \"horoscope\" for today (thanks _URL_0_):\n\n > It's important to communicate your feelings today. You tend to hold them inside and wait until they build up and erupt like a volcano. Emotional blocks in your system are clogging up the works and preventing new, healthier energies from moving in. Say what you need to say to the people who need to hear how you feel.\n\nMost people are bottling something up, so most people will read that horoscope and think \"oo, yeah, that's me right now!\". This has been shown scientifically - ask professionals to write horoscopes, then give half to the \"right\" sign and half to the \"wrong\" sign. The randomised ones will do just as well as the curated ones.", "The zodiac signs are just self fulfilling prophecies of a person's personality. Essentially every zodiac sign specifies that a person will be born with X traits. Let's just use the Chinese zodiac for example because that's the one I'm most familiar with. People who were born on the year of the dog are said to display the qualities of loyalty and trust and people who are born on the year of the chicken are said to display traits such as egotism and ambition. This becomes a massive self fulfilling prediction of a person's traits because usually if a family believes that a child who is born with a certain zodiac sign will have these traits, they will raise the child with these traits in mind telling them they should act a certain way because of their zodiac sign. Consequently the child grows up a certain way because of their sign. People then notice these trends (general trends) and ascribe traits to you based upon your zodiac sign even if they don't know you.", "It's a pseudoscience based on astrology that somehow the stars when you were born affect your personality. It is totally ridiculous and if someone actually thinks they know something about you because of your sign you should probably not trust them with anything important." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "horoscopes.com" ], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "fga1wq8", "fgaxskp", "fgbonoc" ], "score": [ 8, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "I think it just means surroundings.\n\nIn Chemistry, if a reaction occurs in an 'acidic medium', the reaction will only occur when surrounded by acidic radicles.\n\nIn Physics, if sound travels faster in a 'denser medium', it would mean that the sound travels faster if there are more molecules around it (hence, denser).", "A medium is the context or background in which something is contained, regardless of its phase.\n\nA copper wire is the medium through which electrons flow. Light is the medium through which visual information flows.", "A medium is what something is in that is significant or required. Not just what happens to be nearby.\n\nSound waves travel through things. If they are traveling through the air, the medium is the air. The trees, lamp posts, etc nearby are not the medium as they are not what the sound is traveling through.\n\nLikewise for electrons flowing through a copper wire, the wire is the medium - the plastic lining of the wire is not." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c9v6fpl", "c9v7esj", "c9vbet3", "c9ve1a0" ], "score": [ 28, 16, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "Becuase they have plenty of time to charge him with more later. They just threw out a few charges so they can hold him for now.", "Because the charges will read Rape of Victim 1 with several dozen specifications. Rape of Victim 2, again with several dozen specifications, and Rape of Victim 3 with several dozen specifications. \n\nThe reason there is only the three charges with many specifications is that in order to get a conviction, the prosecutor only has to show **one** rape occurred for each specification. Each additional specification for each rape would only add to the sentence. If it was done the way you suggest, the trial would take centuries and the end results would be the same. ", "We are not all native speakers of English so I'd like to explain a point of grammar and usage a helpful friendly manner. We know what you meant and here's some clarification.\n\n > re Surely ---ing a person regularly of 10 years is more ...\n\n\"a person of 10 years\" usuallly means a 10 year old person.\n\nI might have cut my hair a certain way for 10 years. \n\"_For 10 years\"_ is how we talk about duration.\n\n\nThat's all. Thanks for sharing.\n\n", "The police need to file charges to be able to continue to hold him, so they start with what is easily proven. Now that he has been charged with something they can take their time, sort though all the evidence and figure out everything else he can be charged with.\n\nTL;DR - It's a stopgap measure." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dgibkdr", "dgicmfz" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "They can, I think iPhone 7 Plus reveal boasted it has 2x optical zoom. But it turned out while it is there the phone doesn't always use optical zoom first.", "As others pointed out, some do. But the advantages can be questioned. Fixed lenses usually are much sharper for a cheaper price, increasing the resolution of the sensor will mostly be cheaper and show better results. I, like most people, wouldn't compromise on my phone's size to carry a mediocre camera. I guess there is just no demand. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cuf71k0" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "We would eliminate all income tax. The IRS (and all the things that go along with it; e.g. filing taxes every year) is a fairly new creation; for most of the USA's history the government acquired taxes on things like trade and property.\n\nThere's no reason why we couldn't go back to that. The IRS is a hideously inefficient system anyway." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "f20sgzf", "f20t40j", "f20wwgo", "f20y8i8", "f20zmox", "f210gjn", "f211xqa", "f2173g3" ], "score": [ 36, 2, 18, 3, 3, 5, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "It is short for Parallax of 1 arcsecond.\n\nBasically, it is the distance from Earth got an object has to be in order to appear to move one arcsecond in the sky over the course of a year. This translates into a distance of about 3.26 light-years.\n\nAn arcsecond is one sixtieth of ~~a degree~~ an arcminute, there are sixty arcminutes in a degree, and there are 360 degrees in the circle of the sky. Because the position in the sky was one of the most straightforward measurements astronomers could take, it made sense to come up with a unit of measurement that could be easily calculated given just that data. This makes it somewhat comparable to radians in geometry. Radians are also very uncommonly used to measure angles outside of certain mathematical fields that have to deal with coming up with the circumference of an arc based on an angle.", "A parsec is a measurement of length or distance. It's used to measure very, very large distances between objects in space. One parsec is equal to about 31 trillion kilometers, or 19 trillion miles. For example, the nearest star to our sun is about 1.3 parsecs away. \n\n\nIf you're wondering how much a trillion is, it's one thousand billions. And one billion is one thousand millions. And one million is one thousand thousands. So a parsec, which is 31 trillion miles, is a looooooooooooooooong way.", "Hold up your hand in front of your face and look at something that appears to be on the right of your hand. Move your head to the left until your chosen object is to the left if your hand. The object hasn't moved, but it appeared to, because your head moved. Now imagine that was the only way you could measure distance. You could use math (specifically, geometry involving triangles, aka trigonometry) to figure out how far away something is from you, by moving your head a little and seeing how far in your vision the object appears to move. The Parsec is a unit for measuring distances in space, where we can't, for example, put a ruler between two things, or bounce a laser off of something. If an object moves a specific tiny amount in our view of the sky, called an arcsecond, over the course of six months (the time from when the earth is in one position to when it's on the opposite side of the sun, aka as far away as it would ever get from the first position) it's one Parsec away. \n\nComes to about 3.26 light years.", "[This article](_URL_0_) and especially the figures within might be helpful.", "A parsec is just a measure of distance. It's about 3.26 light years, or about 3E13 kilometers.\n\nThings in space are really far apart so it makes sense to use a really big unit of measurements.\n\nBut we can't actually take a measuring tape to the stars. One of the easiest ways to talk about the relative position of stars is by the angle between them with us at the vertex. So you might notice that the angle difference between star A and star B is 2 degrees.\n\nThe problem is that this won't actually tell you how far anything is from anything else. But if we were to take two observations of the same star from two different spots that are sufficiently far apart we can do some basic trigonometry to find the distance.\n\nGiven the distances of space the only practical way to do this is to look at a star at multiple points in a year. That way the movement of the earth around the sun provides a known and big distance to base your calculations on.\n\nThe distance between the earth and the sun is defined as 1 AU. So a parsec is how far away that star needs to be in order to get 1 arcsecond difference between two observations that are 1 AU apart (assuming that 1 AU of movement is orthogonal to the direction of the star).", "See [this](_URL_0_) right triangle? \n\nIf x = 1 arc second (1/3600th of a degree) and A = 1 astronomical unit (an AU, the distance from the sun to the earth), how big is B?\n\nThe answer is one parsec, 3.26 light years.", "Something just dawned on me:This is a fixed distance unit.\n\nIf you took the parallax of an object further away the angle would decrease. You cannot just take a angle measurement and use its arcsecond value to get the distance in \"parsecs\".", "Draw a right triangle with legs A and B. Let A be the shorter leg and B the longer one. Now, if the length of A is the distance between the Earth and the Sun (1 AU) and the angle opposite to A is 1/3600 (1 arc second), then the length of the longer leg B is approximately 1 parsec." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [ "https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=images&amp;cd=&amp;ved=2ahUKEwigzZjWjPnkAhWVpp4KHYdCB6AQjRx6BAgBEAQ&amp;url=https%3A%2F%2Fearthsky.org%2Fspace%2Fwhat-is-a-parsec&amp;psig=AOvVaw0d1oH5n58MpPGoyMD3KXrJ&amp;ust=1569951878554265" ], [], [ "https://vt-vtwa-assets.varsitytutors.com/vt-vtwa/uploads/problem_question_image/image/1097/RightTriangle.jpg" ], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "esdobj6", "esdpbal" ], "score": [ 5, 40 ], "text": [ "Usually its just the adult phase that only lasts for a few days. Theyve evolved a tradeoff of digestive system (or even a mouth) for reproductive organs/anatomy.\n\nThe nymphal stages allow for a long and fulfilling life", "Starvation in some cases. There are some bugs that dont have mouthparts or digestive systems and so cannot eat. They live as long as their initial supply of energy lasts - usually just enough to reproduce - then stop." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dplnj35", "dpm4f5i" ], "score": [ 7, 2 ], "text": [ "Long skinny wings have [less drag](_URL_1_) for the amount of lift they generate, so they're more fuel efficient. But you can't have a long skinny wing on a supersonic airplane: if the wings stick outside the [cone-shaped shock wave](_URL_0_) surrounding the plane, they may be damaged, and if not, the flight physics gets much more difficult.\n\nSo supersonic wings are tapered to stay inside the shock wave cone. They still need enough area to generate lift, though, so they need to be wider from front to back -- thus the delta wing shape.", "The main reason is that, as you get close to supersonic and beyond supersonic, the air behaves differently, and thus the aerodynamics. This means that you'll need different wing geometry, especially in the transition between subsonic and supersonic." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "https://physics.info/shock/", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lift-to-drag_ratio" ], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d6ljwss" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ " > how without holding power and ground of a dc circuit\n\nThe term \"ground\" is not just a quaint name for a terminal connection; the physical ground of the planet is \"ground\" for a circuit to complete. If someone grabs a conductor with electric potential it can go through them to ground out their feet." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cf6iaeu" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "It's somewhere between having a full-time job and an alternate life. You have political alliances, hierarchies of power, very long-term planning, a complex economy, and more. It's a tremendous time sink." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dyisw0z" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "Cracked had an interesting article about this topic awhile back. It’s a comedy site, but the article is pretty well-sourced with hyperlinks.\n\n_URL_0_" ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "http://www.cracked.com/article_18461_5-creepy-ways-video-games-are-trying-to-get-you-addicted.html" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cjencyt", "cjepo8k" ], "score": [ 7, 2 ], "text": [ "Engine braking is used to slow the vehicle by creating back pressure at the exhaust manifold. (The hot gas can't get out quickly - slowing the engine) Thus, braking via the pedal is reduced, prolonging brake life and keeping them cool during extended downhill areas.\n\nIt is not permitted in some places (usually near residences) because when exhaust braking (engine braking) is VERY loud. If you ever hear the big rigs in the mountains while going downhill - that is engine braking. Brr-rrr-rrr-rrr-rrr-rrrr-rrrr-rr-rrrr-rrrrr-rrrrrrr........\n\n:) Cheers!", "A gasoline engine speed is controlled by the throttle valve. When you take your foot off the pedal the throttle closes. The pistons are still pumping, so a vacuum is created in the intake manifold. This tends to slow the vehicle, and helps the brakes. (ignoring overdrive transmission) This is not noisy and is not a problem in residential areas.\n\nA diesel engine (as used in most large trucks) does not have a throttle valve. The speed is controlled by the amount of fuel being injected into the cylinders. When you back off on the accelerator pedal no vacuum would be created to help slow the vehicle UNLESS there is an engine brake fitted (commonly known as a \"jake\"). This modifies the valve train when activated, and makes the familiar loud sound you hear when you are at the motel near the edge of town where the trucks slow down. Some jurisdictions prohibit the use of \"jakes\" in specific areas to make them more livable.\n\nI didn't make this all up: _URL_0_\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_release_engine_brake" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dk2ma7x" ], "score": [ 19 ], "text": [ "The \"gig economy\" is where, instead of having a steady job you go to for 40 hours and week and a stable income from that job, you make money by doing various things on irregular, self-set hours. Some examples might be driving for Uber, doing TaskRabbit tasks, picking orders for Instacart. You might even do these to supplement insufficient hours at a more traditional job, like bar tending or working as a barista, or to supplement income in addition to being a freelance writer/designer/photographer.\n\nIt's becoming increasingly popular because employers don't have to pay for set hours or offer benefits.\n\nFor those earning money that way, it's the freedom to set one's own hours based on income needs, works/school schedule, etc." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cdavd51", "cdavwab" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "Protected by parody laws. You're allowed to make fun of things. They would also be protected if they used the real logos because then they're be protected because those logos actually exist and they're not pretending that they are those companies. This is why you don't need Coca Cola's permission to have someone drink Coke in your movies. ", "Thanks guys. good explanations." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dkhael4", "dkhaemt" ], "score": [ 3, 9 ], "text": [ "It is actually air being expelled.\n\nLarger vehicles use air brakes. They compress air and use that to work the brakes rather than (entirely) counting on hydraulics like smaller vehicles. The advantage to air brakes is the system can be tapped into at any time (adding or removing trailers and such), where hydraulics rely on a closed system (and therefor a set amount of fluid)", "Air being expelled. Truck have air powered brakes as opposed to the fluid hydraulic brakes that you have in your car. \n\nIn fact, trucks have several different braking systems. One of those systems is the spring brake. The spring brake is an emergency brake that uses a powerful spring to keep the brake in place. While the truck is moving, air pressure actually keeps the brake from engaging. When the truck stops and parks, it works like a parking brake. Air is expelled and the brake engages. That's why you hear the air escaping." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "db21n32", "db21pb4", "db21u5v", "db24lnl" ], "score": [ 3, 7, 9, 2 ], "text": [ "There used to be like in Shanghai with various \"quarters\" for different countries. Or Ginja in Tokyo which was designed like a western town to show off the style. \n\nAnd you'll still find American/British schools designed with curriculums designed for expats. \n\nAlso European/western expats in Asia tend to be wealthier on average compared to Chinatowns in the USA that arose from laborer immigrant communities. People would live there because they didn't have much choice otherwise. ", "There have been two areas of China under western European control, [Macau](_URL_0_) was a Portuguese controlled area, and of course, [Hong Kong](_URL_1_) a British controlled colony. Apart from those two areas, China was a pretty closed country, indeed for a time any European found outside those areas were subject to arrest, at best. European behaviour in the country, with Great Britain having several wars revolving around Opium and Tea trade and Portugal trade have meant for a long time we were treated with contempt. So communities in Chinese cities were only short term and based on trade, expat's were few and far between and more likely to be based in Macau or Hong Kong.", "Apart from the historical reasons mentioned here (by /u/Lincolnmp68 ) I would also like to add an economic reason. \n\nWhen immigrants come in large waves and are mostly poor /minority they tend to stick together. Wealthier/highly paid immigrants tend to assimilate. \n\nIn US or other western countries the immigrant communities were built around waves of poorer immigrants. \n\nWestern people living in China are comparatively rich and they never arrived in large waves. So there was no reason for them to coalesce together. ", "There's a fair bit of French architecture in Guangzhou (an entire island on the Pearl River I think) from European traders who were resident there. They were clearly there for generations as these buildings are fancy AF. I don't know if you would call it a French quarter, per se, but it would qualify as an enclave.\n\nThere were also British traders settled in Xiamen, and from what I gather, living in eastern ports during the opium wars and the time there after. I'm less certain on the timing of this one, but was scoping out a trip to Xiamen recently and read of British residents being there centuries ago. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong" ], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "clnij80", "clnizaj", "clnj37m", "clnjkxb", "clnld1l", "clnn6tc", "clnn7jd", "clnpal5", "clnpcf1", "clnqb8a", "clnr1e8", "clnsjb7", "clnvlng", "clnvrww", "clnw7ez", "clo8cb5", "clo8hnv" ], "score": [ 215, 29, 33, 10, 87, 2, 3, 38, 3, 4, 7, 2, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "In many traditions, he doesn't. He's in Hell being tortured along with all of the sinners.\n\nIn other traditions, he's just an overall angry guy who will torture anyone. People in hell are just convenient.\n\nIn jokes, he's usually a real nice guy, until a punchline ending in sex with Bill Clinton.", "Devil is not a ruler of Hell. He doesn't have horns or pitchfork either. It's pop-culture image of him, not how he was written in the Bible.\n\nHe was the best angel of the best, but got into argument with God. God is a guy who wins arguments, so Satan doesn't live with him anymore, instead he leads humanity astray, just to piss God off. Like an angry ex running over your pet dog. \n\nImage of Hell as a series of ironic punishments is also cultural thing. Dante's Inferno (fanfiction) popularized it. Hell in the Bible is a place away from God.", "I can tell you from Islam's (I'm a muslim) perspective. The Devil knows he's doomed, and he tells God that he's going down to earth to corrupt and manipulate the minds and hearts of as many people as he could until the end of time. ", "Because the general understanding of \"hell\" is an amalgamation of a whole bunch of different cosmologies. \n\nIn Judaism for example Satan doesn't rule hell (there isn't really a hell but that's another story). He's an angel whose job is to challenge G-d. He's seen in the book of Job trying to convince G-d that Job is only pious because his life is good, and G-d lets him mess with Job to try to prove it. ", "Your confusion is coming from the fact that what we call 'the Devil' is a combination of three different entities listed in the old and new Testaments.\n\nThe first is the snake in the garden of Eden. This is the creature that tempted Eve to eat of the fruit of Good and Evil and gain self-awareness along with Adam.\n\nThe second entity is the Adversary as he is known in the Old Testament. He is, in effect, a Heavenly version of the District Attorney who stands before God on Judgement Day and lays out the sins of those who stand in Judgement, to provide evidence as to why the Judged do not deserve to enter Heaven. \n\nA prime example of this role of Adversary and DA is the book of Job, where Ha-Satan(Adversary) is in Heaven along with God. God brags on Job's piety and Ha-Satan suggests that his pious nature comes from the fact that God has given him a very good life. So, God takes all that away from Job. In the end, God is proven right and the Adversary is proven wrong, but only after God shames Job for his self-righteousness. \n\nThe third entity is Lucifer, fallen Arch-angel. The story of Lucifer originates in Revelations, the last book of the Bible and many Christians assume that his fall from Heaven occurs before the creation of man, but that's up to debate. \n\nTwo thousand years of translation and re-translation and apocryphal stories from both early Christianity and different eras of Hebrew folklore have seen these three entities end up being merged into a single being with seemingly completely contradictory natures. ", "AFAIK, the devil is tortured in hell rather then 'runs' it. He doesn't 'punish' people, but instead trys to manipulate people so he could get them to feel his pain in hell.", "According to my NIV bible Satan in the original hebrew (or whatever) means \"accuser\". This note appears in the book of Job when Satan shows up to talk to God about Job. Also note that in Job Satan presents himself with the angels in God's court.\n\nIf you read the bible it seems like Satan's job is more to see if people will get themselves into trouble but he is clearly not as powerful as God.\n\nA few examples:\n\n1) Garden of Eden: Satan (the snake) tempts Eve into eating the apple. \n2) Book of Job: Satan requires permission from God to harm Job and his family to prove that Job is not that righteous. But Job is righteous.\n3) Temptation of Christ: This one is a bit unique in that under the theory of a triune god then Jesus IS God. So let us look at two scenarios. A) Christ = God but with the weakness of human form. It is obvious that Satan can tempt God as he practically goads him into letting him harm Job. So this may be just an extension of that. B) Christ is separate from God while human (but still part of an omnipotent god). Then this is a more run of the mill temptation but Satan does not harm Christ he merely makes promises. Which makes it more of an extension of the temptation of Eve.\n\nSo in the bible Satan does not punish sinners (that is God as made obvious in several parts of the bible). \n\nThis is a clear pattern: Eve was without sin before she ate the apple, Job was a righteous man, Christ was obviously without sin. Satan tried to bring them all down. He will tempt them or harm them (with God's permission) to see if the righteous will sin.\n\nTL;DR Satan is God's corrupt District Attorney\n\n", "According to the new testament, the devil has already been defeated. \n\n\"He stripped all the spiritual tyrants in the universe of their sham authority at the Cross and marched them naked through the streets.\" - Col. 2:15\n\nIn those days, when one side would conquer another, they would march the defeated army (and the king) naked through the streets of their towns and put their victory (and the enemies defeat) on display for everyone to see. (That could be considered the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isa. 14:16).\n\nThe devil isn't punishing people for sin (neither is God for that matter). What we see are the effects of sin still present from when the devil was the \"ruler of the world.\" Kind of like when a tornado blows through a town. Even after it passes, it still takes awhile to clean up the damage, and people might still act desperately and harm other people as a result, even though the tornado itself is no longer exercising power.\n\nSo natural disasters, cancer, disease, etc. aren't God or the devil punishing people for naughty behavior, they are simply a result of the world being separated from God (the source of life). It's us experiencing the effects of decay. Just like when skin is removed from the body, it shrivels and dies because it's no longer connected to its source of life. Same happened to humanity. We were like a limb severed from the body, dead and decomposing, but Jesus came and reattached us to where we belong. Though He brought life back into that severed limb, it is still slowly learning how to function again.\n\nPaul wrote in Rom. 8:19-21, that the whole creation is waiting for the sons of God to be made manifest and set it free from the curse. The intersting thing is it doesn't say creation is waiting for GOD to make himself known and set them free, but for the sons of God to make themselves known. Why haven't they? Because our churches are full of motivational speeches and self-help programs instead of teaching people who they really are, and what they are here to do.\n\nIn 1 John, the apostle wrote, \"The reason the Son of God (Jesus) came was to destroy the works of the devil.\" And before Jesus ascended into heaven He pretty much told His followers (the church) to do the same.\n\nThe original Christian mission is not one of \"converting\" the world to God or getting people to repeat a magic prayer to go to heaven when they die. It's to restore the world back to the heaven that it was before it was forfieted to darkness. Jesus never talked about a heaven outside of earth. Instead He said, \"Your Kingdom come, your will be done ON EARTH as it is in heaven.\"\n\nSEMI-TL;DR: In the Bible, the devil is a defeated enemy. He isn't actively runnning around punishing people, neither will he ever get to punish people. He has beem disarmed and defeated by Jesus. The chaos we see in the world today is the effects of sin (choosing independence from God) on the world.\n\nSomeone will say, \"Why does God hold it against us if we choose independence? Is He that concieted?\" No. But it's like trying to choose independence from oxygen. God created man and breathed His own breath into man's lungs. And man said, \"We don't need your breath, we'll make our own!\" And the world has been suffering the effects of asphyxiation ever since. Jesus came, not to shame mankind for forsaking God, but to breathe new life into us again so we would remember where we received life from in the first place. Hence the miracles, which were a way of saying, \"Look! God isn't mad at you. He only wants to make you whole again!\"\n\nLong response is long. :)", "reminds me of this I saw floating about the internet.\n\n_URL_0_\n", "Hell is a bad place because you are completely separated from God. The devil is being punished there too. ", "He doesn't do the punishing. He is just as much trapped there as every other sinner. ", "I'm not 100% sure about any other religion. But in Islam he fails to acknowledge Adam as a special being. He is then shun from Heaven and is put into this world; he isn't killed as he is forgiven. However Allah (God) warns him that he will attempt to sway all Humans from the right path and he will burn along side them in hell. Also God will punish all those who follow the Devil. Religion and Reddit don't go hand in hand. But this is what I've known and learnt : > ", "C.S. Lewis wrote a book called \"The Screwtape Letters\". It is a correspondence between a young demon (Screwtape) and his uncle (Wormwood) as the former attempts to lead a soul into temptation. Its a pretty funny story, but it introduces a demon's-eye view of the world. Torment is their job. They live of the suffering of human souls. The only way hell obtains souls is by tempting people to sin. Without sinners, the demons would have no jobs. But is more than a job, it is described as a cross between a necessity like eating or breathing, and a sexual pleasure. See, the demons are pure evil, they exist to inflict suffering.\n\nIt's obviously a literary liberty with the old/new testament (Lewis was a passionate Christian) since demons and hell are largely an invention of 2nd millenia humans to enroll followers [citation needed.. lol me]. \n\nBut my point is, the book introduces an interesting take sin and eternal damnation which paints the infernal hierarchy with greater depth which might give you some other ways to think about how some famous Christians writers view hell, the devil, sin and punishment.", "The way I see it, he just wants to prove God wrong. God sees the good in us while the Devil sees all the bad and insights us to do more bad. \n\nAlso, the Devil (my opinion) doesn't punish the wicked, all the contrary, we helps them keep doing bad things so they can be as far away from God as possible. ", "Lucifer/Satan does not punish people for sinning. He tricks/tempts people into sinning to ruin God's perfect creation. God punishes Satan as well as unrepentant sinners/unbelievers. \n\nSatan will suffer with all other unforgiven sinners, and he wants to ruin God's creation, so he tempts us to sin so that we suffer too, both in this life and the next. ", "Well..... The devil wants to punish and torture all people, but only those who have sinned are turned over to him. ", "Why would you assume logic would be involved with people worshiping the son of a god? My kids are fine, but I would rather you got instruction from me and not my kids, if it's work related. Of course, I am assuming god is in the business of religion." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [ "http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/the-devil-is-a-dickhead.jpg" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ciqynxj" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "You are welcome to start your own currency, using literal photocopies of Monopoly money if you want to. The trick is getting other people to accept it, which means you need to provide some kind of benefit and/or a promise of security to prospective users, of which you need a substantial number to make it work.\n\nThis same concept works on a small scale, such as with subway tokens or skeeball tickets at Chuck E Cheese; on a medium scale like coupons provieded by large multinational chains; or on a large scale, such as national currencies or crypotocurrencies like Bitcoin. The important thing to remember is that currency is **a reliable, albeit abstract, means of exchange.** Functionality and stability need to be your primary concerns, whatever scale you're working on." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c3e156v", "c3e18ol", "c3e18zc" ], "score": [ 4, 68, 3 ], "text": [ "I can give you an incomplete answer:\n\nMuch like in other countries, there's a split between the younger and older generation. The older generation tends to view their government as utopian (because they get most of the perks they set up for themselves in the past); the younger thinks it has flaws, but it's nowhere near the dissatisfaction level of the current U.S.\n\nCorruption is rampant, but the average person doesn't see it this way, since it's mostly hush-hush. It's usually money-related or job-ladder favors. For comparison, I would say worse than the U.S., but better than India, where you can bribe a police officer on the street for something like a traffic offense.\n\nThere's a fear of being too politically active, because you might just get arrested or worse, 'go missing.' It's also a cultural thing to just 'follow the crowd' and 'not stick out too much.' The most common method of expressing dissatisfaction is to hide behind a *weibo* (similar to Twitter, but without the monopoly) and post about it. The Chinese government doesn't yet appear to have the tech-savviness to police these yet.\n\nWith regards to censorship - not very many people care about it (keep in mind I'm still considering the whole population, not just the tech-savvy part). This is because there's a lot of things in the U.S./Europe that would be illegal that are legal there, e.g. downloading music. The understanding in China is that the ads themselves are enough to cover the cost of the download.\n\nThe only other country that I've ever known them to express a strong opinion towards is the U.S. They tend to think of Americans as arrogant, meddling busybodies (too much war!) who have blond hair and blue eyes.\n\n**tl;dr** China is probably as politically locked-down as you think, but the average citizen doesn't seem to be too aware of this, or just doesn't envision enough difference if it wasn't to care.", "I hope this isn't too long-winded, but I guess you're going to have to read everything in order to understand the complexity of Chinese politics. I will use a lot of metaphors and similes to systems that you may be familiar with. I studied Chinese politics at a Western university as well as a top university in China.\n\n* **Who is in charge?**\n* **How is power distributed at the center?**\n\nThe government is split between ***party*** organs and ***state*** organs. The party organ has the **Politburo Standing Committee**. As a metaphor, think of this as the 9 most powerful people in the Democratic or Republican parties that make all the policy decisions, except it's always one party, the **Chinese Communist Party**. Hu Jintao is the boss here. The party organ also has the **National Party Congress** that meets every year (made up of 2000 party members). Think of this as the Republican National Convention or Democratic National Convention. They don't make policy or have power like the Politburo Standing Committee, but they get together to talk. This is where major announcements are delivered, like e.g. the new massive rail expansion project.\n\nYou also have the government organs. These exist for the party to *govern through*. The main part is the **Standing Committee of the State Council**. This is like a cabinet of ministers (or like secretaries like in the US). Wen Jiabao, the Premier, is the boss here. Also as a part of the state, you have the **National People's Congress**. This is a huge body of 3000 politicians which are elected by politicians from the provinces. They are sort of like the American House of Representatives. But they have no power. They are like the American House of Representatives, and not the entire Congress because their major role is more like a group of lobbyists for regional interests. \n\nAnd then you have a weird group called the **Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference**, which is how the Chinese Communist Party gives 'voice' to those not in the party. It is largely made up of business leaders today, and acts as the link between government and business in order to make the country's economy grow.\n\nThe relationship between the party and state is a little redundant. The Standing Committee of the State Council is made up entirely of Party members. There is no puppetmaster relationship because the state is made up of the party.\n\nSo what why do we still distinguish between the two? What role does one play that the other doesn't? The Party's role is to translate ideology into policy. The state's role is to implement the policy. The Party acts to promote and reward 'cadre' (party leaders), and the best bureaucrats are selected by the party. They are called **nomenklatura**. The Party can't be bothered to control every aspect of the public sector, so they delegate power to bureaucrats that don't act officially in the name of Party. These bureaucrats make up the **bianzhi**, or 'establishiment', which is similar to their public service. The party leaders (nomenklatura) and the administrative tasks they delegate to public service professionals (bianzhi) is where the party and state interlock.\n\n**TL;DR: Although there are state institutions, the country is largely run by CCP members, and real power is concentrated at the very top.**\n\n* **How centralised/decentralised is the country?**\n* **How is power distributed at different levels?**\n\nAnother area is the fact that there are different levels of government. You can't understand Chinese government without understanding it's levels of government because if there is any body that \"checks\" the central government, it may be the provinces.\n\nJust like the U.S., China is a big country. The way the government does its job in such a big country is to delegate power to sub-governments. In the U.S., the states have their own power to do many things. This is a \"division of power\". This is what it means to be a federalist country.\n\nChina is big too. But the difference is that the central government doesn't want to give power to the provinces (they have 22 provinces and 4 cities big enough to have province status). They do not 'divide' power between the province and themselves like the U.S., Canada, or India does. They let the provinces do some of the things to take some weight off of themselves, and to allow the provinces to take care of themselves. In the late 80s, the central government allowed the provinces to raise and keep their own tax revenues (they call this **'eating in separate kitchens'**).\n\nSo wouldn't the central government be afraid of loosing power to the provinces now that the provinces have the power to tax and spend on their own? How does the central government *see* what's going on in the provinces to keep an eye on them. They use the ***cadre evaluation system*** to keep an eye on the provinces. This means that the central government can appoint or fire anyone at a lower government. Just like any company, this forces local employees to please and suck up to the central goverment--if they want a raise.\n\nJust like a company, lower level governments report to upper level governments. The city officials do their work and report to their province officials for evaluation. The provinces then do their work and report to the central government for evaluation. This is called the ***tiao* relationship** (vertical hierarchy).\n\nWhat about the Party? How does the Party make sure all these local governments are following their ideology and policies? The city officials have to report to their city party committee. The provincial officials have to report to their provincial party committee. And of course, same at the central level. This is the ***kuai* relationship** (horizontal accountability).\n\nSo there are two bosses to report to! In the case of a city government, what if the Party Committee of that city tells the city to do something different than what their provincial superiors told them? Usually these two argue over power, but in the majority of cases, the Party committee wins out, because the Chinese Communist Party evaluates and elects all government officials.\n\nSo now we know how the central government *sees* the local governments, and how they give orders. They do it this way because they want constant control over the lower levels of government, unlike in the U.S., Canada or India, which simply give their lower governments their own authority.\n\n**TL;DR: China is a big country and its government looks after the country by assigning some powers to different levels of the country. Nonetheless, the central government in Beijing has the ultimate word.**\n\n**EDIT:** This is not to say the provinces and cities are not powerful. The provinces on the coast are rich and play host to China's economic boom. They have considerable lobby power and usually get what they want because the central government wants to act seamlessly to promote their economic success. Shanghai is big enough to have province-status, and that former city's leader now runs the administration of the Party and is most likely going to be the next leader of China (to replace Hu Jintao).\n\n* **How democratic or otherwise is the country?**\n\nChina is **very** undemocratic. Although a large 6-8% of the citizens are members of the party, this does not satisfy the democratic requirement of *effective* citizen participation as important decision making is exclusively made at the top levels. In 1979, a law was passed allowing for direct election of delegates to township and county-level congresses \"under controlled circumstances\". **This process is not entirely democratic** as not just anyone could run. You have to be nominated and endorsed by the CCP as deputy governors. The NPC has taken a more assertive role in seeing who they want running in elections and who they do not. Elections matter only if they are *competitive*\n\nThere are also elections at the village level. You can't control everything, the central government thought, so they ceded power to elections (I'm sure the central government would control village-level politics if they could). These elections are more competitive than the township delegate elections. After three or four rounds of elections, Chinese villagers began to learn that elections are an easy way to get rid of unpopular leaders. But how much impact to village-level policy makers really have when their resources are controlled by the government right above them? Around 82% of villages today hold elections today. \n\n**TL;DR: Despite there being elections, they are semi-competitive at best, and only at the lowest levels of government, where the least important policy choices are made. The country is not democratic in how it lacks elections in the most important parts of the government.**\n\nWhat about free press? The media is largely controlled by the government under China Central Television (CCTV). This is not a free media system, even thought he government allows producers some flexibilities. The people who run CCTV are appointed by the State, unlike other public broadcasting elsewhere (PBS, BBC, CBC). It's really tough to run editorials critical of the government, although more recently, there have been attempts. You know how Fox News broadcasters receive memos directing them what opinions their reporters should take? Imagine this on a large, institutionalized and unapologetic level with CCTV News, but this time the government is writing those memos. For example, recently, the government of China placed a quota on the number of entertainment shows in order to stifle the influx of \"Western culture\".\n\nWhat about free expression? Last year there were thousands of protests in China, but nearly all of these protests were launched against companies and local governments, not the central government. Those protesting the core and structure of the Chinese government (Chinese dissidents and pro-democracy activists like Ai Weiwei, Tan Zuoren, Cheng Jianping, Professor Guo Quan and Professor Liu Xiaobo) are quickly detained and jailed. The laws under which these activists are jailed include \"subversion of state power\", \"disturbing social order\", \"inciting social disorder\", and \"illegal possession of state secrets\".\n\nThe internet is a part of democracy, and expression in its truest form. The Chinese government is widely known to censor the internet (their efforts are known as the Great Firewall of China). The censorship efforts even come from non-state actors. Just as we may call militias and armed people fighting *for* a government a *paramilitary*, there is a *para-censhorship* group of internet users called the 50 Cent Party which takes it on themselves to post comments favorable towards CCP policies on internet message boards.\n\n**TL;DR: The television and internet media are strictly and controlled and regulated to favour the government. The country is not democratic because there is little press freedom. I want to say that this is changing, but the change is too slow to even take notice. There is very little freedom of political expression in China if that expression is critical of the government.**\n\n* **How engaged is the average Chinese citizen in the politics of their country? What do they think about their political situation?**\n\nWhat about the people? What do the people think of what's going on? They *define democracy differently*. If you begin to talk to a Chinese citizen about democracy, you'll find out in a few minutes that you two are talking about two totally different things. To the Chinese citizen, democracy means **socialist democracy**, which is more advanced than **liberal democracy**, because it's not victim to minority pressures and interests. The problem is that this leads to a tyranny of the majority. But Chinese citizens don't see that as a problem. The people (mass line) are the most important interest. Democracy is populism there, whereas here in the West, we're well aware of the dangers of populism (European democracies succumbed to fascism, and American democracy now suffers from those who are politicking for popularity). \n\nToday, 63% of Chinese believe the current regime is democratic, whereas 12% believe it is dictatorial. The Chinese trust their and outside NGOs, businesses, police and local governments the least, and the central government, the party and the army the most. This is because there are very weak labour protections in China, and companies many times don't pay employees the pensions they are entitled to. Local governments are most susceptible to corruption. The central government is seen as a 'father' that can right a wrong. \n\n**TL;DR: The people largely support the central government, but not always the local governments and companies. They have a different idea of democracy that does not consider minority rights, and they believe this conception of democracy is better than Western decision making.**\n\n* **How do they view countries outside of China?**\n\nStay out of our business! You have to understand Chinese history to understand why the don't like other countries interfering in their politics and society. Britain was trying to pry open Chinese markets against the wishes of the administration to sell China addictive opium. This led to two wars in which China lost big time (including Hong Kong). Japan invaded China several times, leading to brutal occupations of the country's East Coast. China wants Taiwan back, but the West continues to apply pressure against it. Throughout history, other countries have meddled in China's domestic politics.\n\nBut so what! That's history. What do the people think?! Well, politicians use these historical *stories* to create memories in citizens for popular support. These historical stories also work psychologically, as Chinese continue to try to find dignity in their identities. History, and historical stories matter. The result is that Chinese citizens aren't all too happy with the outside world. They have a victimization mentality.\n\nUnless, that is, if outside relationships provide economic growth. China vigorously pursues trade and economic ties with other countries, namely for natural resources such as oil and metals. Their strong presence in Africa is for this purpose, but unlike the West, China doesn't attach strings to their trade with poorer African countries. Because they don't want to be told what to do, they don't tell others what should be done. Many cite the moral implications of dealing and fueling African and other dictatorships through this policy.\n\nAlthough a large part of China's relationship with the outside world is economic, it's not all that. China has been active in attempting to foster social relationships with the outside world by building Chinese language and culture schools abroad called Confucius Institutes. This policy, China hopes, would improve the West's understanding of China, in their attempts to improve their soft power.\n\n**TL;DR: The Chinese suffer from a victimization mentality that makes them oppose outside influence. Their relationship with outside actors are almost exclusively economic, although there are growing attempts at social relationships.\"\"**\n\n**ULTIMATE TL;DR: Shit's in lock-down, son.**", "I'm from a Chinese family, so I can provide perspective on *How do they view countries outside of China* from speaking with relatives.\n\nMany older people still have a very strong bias against Japan because of WWII. Many people who grew up during the Cold War also have a bias against the American government (not necessarily the people), because they feel American imperialism is just a parallel or continuation of European imperialism that devastated China for over 100 years previously. \n\nThere's an attitude of \"America should mind their own business\" or basically \"this is the Chinese sphere of influence, please get out\"\n\nHorrible racism against Africa and black people, as well as southeast asians. This stems from a misguided association that poverty=stupidity=worthlessness.\n\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "czrzjpv" ], "score": [ 5 ], "text": [ "What do you mean by \"being washed?\" The most common pigment used to create black ink nowadays is carbon black -- literally charred carbon, as in burnt coal or charcoal, so there's nothing purple about it.\n\nBut -- if you run a solvent, like water, over paper printed with carbon black, what the water is taking away are those things that are attracted to and are soluble in it -- and carbon black is water soluble. \n\nHow does carbon black create \"black?\" By preventing the reflection of light. But, when you dissolve it in water, what happens? Its powers to absorb all light are reduced because the molecules are pulled apart and diluted.\n\nAnd... how do the colors in the spectrum run, from shortest to longest wavelength? From deep-blue/violet to red.\n\nSo... the ink, when it's been used to print, is actually black. But as soon as you start to dilute it and lift it from the page it starts to become less opaque (or less absorptive) through dilution. At first, this means that you'll see deep violet/purple, but keep washing long enough, and you'll see all colors through the spectrum until you hit red." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c93cmvr", "c93dwoz", "c93e9tp", "c93ehsf", "c93g20r" ], "score": [ 46, 9, 7, 3, 3 ], "text": [ "Straight line speed is due largely to power-to-weight ratio. Formula 1 cars have pretty powerful engines, but they're also incredibly light, giving them an excellent power-to-weight ratio.\n\nCornering speeds are due to aerodynamics. The cars' wings literally push the cars into the ground, enabling the tyres to grip even in high speed corners.\n\nThey also have phenomenal brakes, which, combined with their light weight and very sticky tyres, means they can stop quickly.\n\nFun fact: if you consider that a 0-60 time of 4 seconds in a road car is pretty quick, then you might like to consider that a Formula 1 car can do 0-100 *and then back to 0 again* in under 4 seconds.", "doesn't explain why...but show them this video \n\n_URL_0_", "Because they are the fighter jets of cars. If a bus is a jumbo jet, a car is a small propeller plane, then an F1 car is a fighter jet.\n\nThey are cars, that cost millions and millions built to go as fast as we can make a car go around a track. And they are driven by some of the most talented drivers out there. It is a single point where human skill and engineering come to a cross. All with the single goal of going as fast as they can around a track.\n\nSo yes, they are fast. Why are they fast? because we made them to be fast, and we are very good at making things. Then we take someone who is very good at driving things and pay him to drive our fast thing as fast as he can. ", "[Relevant Top Gear](_URL_0_)", "I usually show this video: _URL_0_\n\nIt shows the difference in speed and acceleration between an F1 car, a fast sports car, and a normal car on an actual track. It's great for explaining how powerful the F1 cars are." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTS0qM7BJ6s" ], [], [ "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGUZJVY-sHo" ], [ "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VXNS7XPZnM" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ch7mfvv", "ch7mypc", "ch7nas7", "ch7pcow", "ch7qe0j", "ch7rb2w", "ch7sgb9", "ch7t22f", "ch7t7xo", "ch7tlh6", "ch7ubi6", "ch7vqgx", "ch81iv0", "ch85027", "ch88l46", "ch8aype" ], "score": [ 13, 220, 3, 2, 2, 4, 5, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "They're trying to copy German luxury brands, where model names are either simple numbers or have some sort of code/heirarchy (even the old Volkswagen beetle was technically named the type 1). Mercedes has been using a letter for type of car and numbers for engine size since before WWII and many brands have tried to copy them to since the 80's when they came to dominate the luxury segment. Since then the major Japanese manufacturers have launched spinoff luxury brands, Lexus, Infiniti and Acura, while Cadillac and Lincoln have tried to rebrand themselves to generate interest from younger buyers. For example, Acura used to use names like Integra and Legend but switched to letters to be more like their German competitors. ", "It's all down to how the companies are trying to market themselves.\n\nLuxury car companies try to build a reputation on the company name rather than the car model: they want people saying \"in my new Mercedes\" rather than \"in my new SR2\" so that people buy cars based on the company name and associate the classiness with the company name rather than any specific model.\n\nMore general manufacturers like Ford and Toyota have such a range of different types of cars that trying to build up a reputation on their company name would actually be detrimental. Toyota wants \"Camry\" to mean efficient and \"Hilux\" to mean tough and powerful but not vice versa. \n\nAnother smaller difference is one of turnover. If a certain model is terrible then it's easier to bury that model name and not have it rub off on the company name in the second case. A company is more likely to have a terrible model when they have a much wider range. \n", "This is an opinion rather than an answer, but I believe it is in order to prevent comparison. It's much easier to compare a Polo to a Fiesta than it is to compare a 525i to an A6. The numbers give more vague descriptions of the products, and the manufacturers are working to make that even more complex. BMW, for example, has recently stopped using its classic naming scheme (i.e. class then engine size in 100 ccs) for no apparent reason. \n\nFurthermore, with a luxury car there are many more options and particularities that set each individual car apart than there are with cheaper models. What I mean is most Polos are the same, but a BMW can have a wider range of engines, options ranging from banal to luxurious, etc.", "Rolls Royce - Phantom \nAny Lamborghini \nEtc", "With luxury models, the number usually refers to something. With Mercedes and BMW all numbers refer to engine size, Xi means all wheel drive... For instance the Mercedes E350 has a 3.5 liter v6 the E550 has a 5.5 V8, the E63 AMG has a 6.2 V8...etc.\n\nPorsche don't name their models this way because the engine size stay the same... The Carrera (or 911, and all porsche models) have the base model, the \"S\" model with a bit more HP, the 4 and 4S\" same things but all wheel drive, the turbo which is an \"S\" model with turbo chargers. \n\nThe way I would summarize it is that luxury brands use numbers to logically differentiate the models within a \"class\" like the Mercedes C,E,S classes or BMW 3,5,7 series. \n\nLike others have mentioned, higher end brands use their brand name to sell the cars (Mercedes, BMW, Porsche) while lower end manufacturers use the model name (Camry, Mondeo, etc) \n\nThat's why they say when you buy the entry level model of a luxury brand you're just posting for the badge...\n\nHope this helped!", "Mazda is a conventional car manufacturer and only uses numbers", "Often the nice models have status info in the name. The Mercedes E350, for example, is an E class (level of luxury on Mercedes scale) with a 3.5 liter engine. \n\nIt is also just a cultural thing based on where the car was designed. Germany is more industrial, and (very generally) gives it's cars more structured names (R8, SLS, 918, etc). Italy often gives it's nice cars word names (Aventador, Daytona, quadraporte, etc).", "Ummm, I wouldn't exactly call my old fiat 127 a luxury model.", "The world's most expensive and fastest car was given a name. The Bugatti Veyron. On the other hand ww2 surplus jeeps were sold to the public as the CJ. All basic Mazda models have just numbers 3 and 6. So to answer your question there is no trend here car names are determined by marketing people.", "Most Luxury cars are European. Europe has Germans. They have many very nice cars and an awesome road to drive them on. Germans are all for efficiency. So instead of a name, they want something like MX32.5 where 2.5 is the liter and m is the series model and x3 is the trim level.\n\nWhile thinking of Mercedes Benz as a brand means nice car, Saying \"I have a Mercedes Benz AMG\" takes it to the next level, and at that point I don't care about the model MX32.5 details, I care that its a Benz AMG.\".\n\nThough even a common car like a Subaru can have some additions to their name. Impreza (baseline, 170 hp), Impreza 2.5i(premium features, 170hp), Impreza WRX STI (sleeper rally car, 300hp)\n\nThis is something I think about when stuck in traffic. Luxury people want their car to sound expensive because they are used to hearing things like that. Course with Tesla Model S they are bucking the trend.", "So you have to say the name of the manufacturer if you want to tell someone you drive.\n\nBob : Hey Joe - what'cha driving?\n\nJoe : It's a 2010 Civic. What about you?\n\nBob : An M3.\n\nJoe : What's an M3?\n\nBob : Sorry... a BMW M3.\n\nJoe : Oh.\n", "Personally, I find that the number/letter combos are not very effective. Quick, what's the difference between a MKS and a MKX, or a MKZ? Exactly. ", "They want you to remember the brand no the model.", "\"People don't want cars named after hungry old Greek broads!\" -Herbert Powell", "The car companies think it sounds cooler.", "Here's an answer that I haven't seen.\n\nThe conventional models, most commonly japanese origin, usually have their names derived from latin, or a romanticized version of its name in japanese. \n\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "d60yt88", "d60ytfd", "d614m1x" ], "score": [ 2, 2, 4 ], "text": [ "Both. \n\nPhysical microphones are used to record audio - whether on the set, on location or later on in a studio. Software is later used for mixing, and can redirect specific tracks to specific channels. ", "A lot of movies don't use the recorded audio on-set. A ton of movies and tv shows used ADR, which is the actors go into a studio and dub over themselves, comedy movies are a main exception. Secondly, almost all the sound effects are not recorded on set, those are done in the studio as well. So, all the sounds are actually meant to go to different speakers. \n \nAlso, depends on the movie, a summer blockbuster is way more likely to do this than some indie movie. \n \nYou can have simulated surround, I can set up my surround sound system to mimic the stereos (or use Dolby Pro Logic II to intelligently decide) for the rears and have the center play all vocal-related frequencies.", "The sounds that you hear in movies, like the images on the screen, are a completely manufactured product. Very rarely are you ever hearing just the sound that was recorded live on-set in an unaltered form.\n\nLet's set a simple scene. A couple are eating lunch in a diner. They are having a conversation when there is a car crash outside, and a waitress in the background drops her tray to the floor.\n\nThere are several sound elements here:\n\n* The dialog of the actors\n* The sound of objects being manipulated by the characters (glasses, utensils, and so forth)\n* The background noise of the diner\n* The car crash outside\n* The tray full of dishes hitting the floor\n\nTo record the dialog, you have two options - direct mike the actors (hide a wireless pack in their costume) or use an overhead boom mike. With direct miking, you can usually use the audio recorded on set in the final mix. You have two separate channels of audio - one from each of the actors - that are pretty clean of background noise. If you boom mike, you get one channel of combined dialog that has a higher chance of having extra noise or other defects.\n\nFor background noise, you can use stock sound from a library. Or, you can drop a couple of recorders into an actual diner at lunch rush and mix the resulting ambient sound into a stereo background track. Having the on-set sound be a realistic representation of an actual business is too much of a stretch - would pretty much never do this.\n\nThe car crash is likely a library sound, composed of a few elements (tire squeal, impact, debris hitting the ground, etc.).\n\nThe sounds of the characters moving their glasses around, cutting their food, placing their fork or knife on their plate, stirring their drink, and so forth are \"foley\" recordings. As is the tray of dishes being dropped. In a sound studio, these noises are recorded as separate elements by a foley technician who performs them in sync with the video.\n\nIf on-set dialog was recorded, and it's usable, then that becomes the primary dialog track. If it's not, the actors will come into the studio and re-read their lines in sync with the video, called \"ADR\" (Automatic Dialog Replacement) or \"looping.\"\n\nThere are now potentially a couple of dialog tracks, 3-4 tracks of foley, 2 tracks of ambient noise, a car crash element, and a tray crash element. All recorded at different times from different sources.\n\nThen in comes the sound engineer. Let's assume a 5.1 mix. They will clean up and equalize/normalize the dialog track(s), add any room effect reverb necessary in the case of close-miking or ADR, and use the surround pan control of the mixing software to place the dialog in the center channel. Some of the room effect will usually be mixed into the left and right front mains.\n\nFoley sound for the focal characters gets mixed primarily into front left/right.\n\nAmbient background noise is distributed between front left/right and surround left/right, with the sound engineer making the determination whether the sound stage is more observational (balanced to the front) or immersive (more ambient in the surrounds).\n\nThe skid and crash noises would likely be mixed primarily into the surround rears, as the action occurs out of shot and in a different \"space\" than that onscreen. The engineer may also pan the effect (have it appear to move from the right to left) to give a sense of motion.\n\nThe dropped tray probably gets mixed pretty strongly in the L/R mains, with a moderate amount of spillover into the surrounds. As one expects the sound of a full tray of dishes hitting the floor to more or less fill the room.\n\nEvery element described can have its volume adjusted, reverb levels adjusted, be EQ'd, and its position in the 5.1 soundstage manipulated individually by the engineer. When it's done right, you're fooled into thinking it's realistically \"live\", when in actuality it's anything but." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cpwqzw8", "cpwrrld", "cpwtbq8", "cpwtntn", "cpwwvy1", "cpwxyx1", "cpwyfsi", "cpwywrr", "cpwzate", "cpx12l5", "cpx3i8v", "cpx52qn", "cpx5f35", "cpxic3e", "cpxlakp" ], "score": [ 19, 238, 19, 71, 3, 3, 4, 7, 2, 3, 8, 2, 2, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Because we are bigger basically. Is it fair? maybe not. Iran doesn't have to listen to us either though. So we can say no you cant have them but they can go make them anyways. We just might then go to war over it or exercise sanctions. ", "Iran is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and has therefore agreed to not build nuclear weapons. \n\nSource:\n_URL_0_", "It's more like we won't let Iran make nuclear weapons without repercussions. Right now, those are heavy economic sanctions that Iran's people have grown tired of. And those sanctions are multinational, not just the US.\n\nThe other side to it, is if Iran decides to pursue nuclear weapons anyway, it is going to trigger a nuclear arms race in the middle east, and that is BAD. Look at how unstable they are. Saudi Arabia, Iran's rival, has already said they want the same deal Iran gets. And you better believe that Israel, Iran's arch-enemy, will declare their nuclear weapons. They wont say the have them and they wont say the don't have them, but it is believed they do.\n\nNow Iran can still choose to pursue nuclear weapons, it's just that the repercussions will likely lead to military intervention by someone, probably Israel, to keep that from happening. ", "International relations is not about fairness. Its about various actors each trying to get what they believe is best for themselves done. Quite a few actors, including powerful ones, think Iran getting nuclear weapons is a bad thing. Thus they are going to do what they can to stop it from happening. \n\nThere is no rule from on high here. Its the anarchic system, the powerful do what they want. Either entirely for their own interests or because they legitimately think its the right thing, or both. ", "Because we are immensely powerful and have a leadership position in the world, where Iran is not and does not.", "Because if Iran have Nuclear weapons then they end up like North Korea (another country we can not bomb anymore)...\n\nIt will only lead to great difficulty killing iranians because they have the bomb. The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must. If everyone had the bomb then we would have no power and then we could not bomb them when they don't listen to us. We would have to live in a world where we could not kill muslims.", "International affairs are a state of nature - - there is no actual government or state under whose authority we agree to live under. Between nations, you can only keep that which you can hold onto with your own hands or convince other countries to let you keep. \n\nLots and lots of countries have decided that a nuclear Iran is an awful, awful idea (which it is) and so they banded together to put economic sanctions in place to put pressure on Iran to come to an agreement about stopping their nuclear research. The Iranian government is feeling the pressure, and so are willing to come over the negotiation table (across from the countries that have enacted the sanctions) to put their program \"on hold\" in exchange for an easing of the economic sanctions. \n\nIn short, we get to tell them \"no\" because we are big and powerful and committed enough to stop trading with them unless they do what we want. ", "There is some rampant misunderstanding of international relations going on in this thread\n\nThe reason \"we\" (the United States) \"get\" to decide whether or not Iran is allowed to have a nuclear program is because the United States is a global hegemon. It has the *hard power* (military might, economic force) and *soft power* (diplomatic clout, etc.) to exercise significant influence over geopolitics.\n\nThe United States is doing this because it perceives an Iranian nuclear program as a threat to regional security. Whether it would be an aggressive threat and not a bulwark against the same type of attacks that American and Israeli hawks are threatening, or whether Iran even seeks a nuclear weapon at all, is for everyone else to bicker about in rest of the comments.\n\n\nRegardless, **TL;DR** the United States does not want want an Iranian weapons program because it perceives this as a threat to regional stability. It \"gets to\" make a fuss about this because it has the power and influence to make its key issues relevant on the global stage.", "Because we still hold all the patents from the 1940's", "Iran signed a treaty stating that they would not build nuclear weapons. We get to enforce that treaty. ", "The real answer is that we get to decide if they are allowed to make nukes, because we already have nukes.", "The problem with nuclear weapons is that they're really not that hard to make. The hardest part is acquiring the special nuclear material (SNM) that will actually sustain a super critical reaction. Al queda could easily build working a nuclear bomb (probably not very efficient, but working) if they had a way to enrich Uranium enough to make it work. \n\nThis brings us to the original question, why don't we want Iran building them? Obviously theres the big point that we just don't trust them and would always like to have that upper hand over them. But honestly, we just want nobody else building them. In the US we have an enormous amount of safeguards around nuclear materials so that it would be extremely hard to steal or transport any. The Soviet Union is a lot more relaxed around their SNM, but it would still be very difficult to obtain. The problem is, we can't afford for a terrorist organization to obtain any SNM from any source. And the more countries who are making it, the more likely it is that their safeguards will be more relaxed than ours and lead to a vulnerability. Especially in a region as unstable as the Middle East. ", "Look at the war between Shia and Sunni muslims, would it be a good idea to let either side develop nuclear weapons?", "1. The fewer nuclear weapons in the world, the better.\n2. They could point them at Israel, who is a US ally.\n3. They could point them at Saudi Arabia (classic Sunni-Shiite conflict), which could make the whole region unstable.\n4. Even if this Iranian government is responsible, revolutions happen in this part of the world all the time. Remember, this regime has only been in power since the 1970s. Some nut like Hussein or Gadhafi could take over and nukes would be part of their prize.\n5. They could be sold or funneled to smaller and less-predictable groups, like Hezbollah.\n6. American arrogance (backed up by military and monetary supremacy).\n7. The other members of the UN Security Council probably wouldn't like it either.", "In true eli5 fashion, the bottom line is:\n\nBecause we have the power to do so." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "http://fas.org/nuke/control/npt/text/npt3.htm" ], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "f84vg4q", "f87i6bp" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "First of all, \"you just burned 200 calories\" is rarely true. It is too different for different people. However, you are to some degree correct. You are in fact burning calories in the moment. However, most of your weight (well, \"burnable weight\") is made of protein and fat. Your body is not fast enough to start burning fat fast enough. This is, very simplified, why you \"run out\" of energy, but still have plenty of fat on your body that you could technically burn. What you are burning is sugars, or carbs. If you ate carbs the right amount of time before you run, this is what you burn. If there is non available, you faint. \n\n\nSo how does this actually translate to a loss of fat on your body? Your body is constantly needing sugars to keep everything going. If you burn your carbs, your body will start turning protein and fat into sugar. Not fast enough to satisfy your workout, but maybe your heart two hours later (only symbolic example, not physically correct). This is probably why people talk about the \"afterburner effect\".\n\nPlease ask if you want more, or if you want more detailed/specific information.", "Just chiming in to address some issue about how your body \"burns\" fuel and how to maximize fat loss through diet. Earlier posters are correct that your body doesn't use fat or protein directly - it must use sugars/carbs (in the simplest sense) for energy especially during prolonged exercise. It's important to note that there's no valid evidence that maintaining a 3,000 (or 3,500) calorie deficit yields a pound of fat loss - in fact, all evidence points against that being a valid statement. In other words, there's little truth to \"eat less, move more\" as a weight-loss methodology. \"Eat right and move somewhat\" is much better prescription if fat loss is your goal.\n\nThe body doesn't use up all the available sugars before converting fat and/or protein to usable fuel sources - this process (especially pulling fat out of storage) happens continuously. Fat tissue is constantly being broken down and released into the blood to be transported where it can be used as the precursor to fuel. However, the opposite is also happening continuously - sugars are being converted to fat and being stored, and fat is being deposited into storage. These processes happen all the time. What dictates (for most people) which process \"wins\" is insulin levels in the blood (and to some extent the body's sensitivity to insulin). Higher insulin levels = more overall fat storage and less overall drawing on fat stores for fuel. This is true even if you have a caloric deficit - if you eat sugary and starchy things, you will have a nearly impossible time reducing fat even if you burn more calories than you consume. \n\nKeeping insulin levels low is THE key to fat loss. Full stop. (And again, for most people - there are some with other endocrine issues that impair the functional work of insulin.) Before and after working out, and just generally throughout the day (and life), keep insulin levels low and fat will melt away, and that's largely independent of how much you actually eat! Without insulin, the body cannot store fat, and excess calories will not be retained - you'll either use the food consumed as fuel or pass it.\n\nKeeping insulin in check isn't that difficult - just ELIMINATE things that spike insulin levels. Pretty much anything sugary or starchy raises insulin dramatically, so work to avoid those things - protein and fat won't impact insulin levels, so no need to avoid those things (when working for fat loss). In direct terms, anything with added sugar (which is nearly everything in packaging or a bottle in a supermarket) and things like bread, pasta and rice should be avoided, pretty much all veggies are fine, especially cruciferous ones and green/leafy ones, fruits are fine but more fibrous ones are generally a better option and meat, fish, etc. are fine in abundance. Things like soda, juice, sweets, nearly all packaged baked goods, most flavored yogurt, etc. are better left on the store shelf.\n\nThis type of eating seems extreme based on the modern diet, but is in fact how humans have eaten throughout most of their existence. We started to eat far more insulin-producing foods in the 1970's and despite the introduction of every type of diet and exercise program since then, we've just continued to gain more and more weight (at least in most of the western world). It takes some effort to break out of the \"eat bready, starchy, sugary things more and fatty, high-protein things less\" mode, but once you do, it'll be easy to maintain and your body simply won't be able to store fat. \n\nI know this is well beyond the scope of your question, but wherever fat loss is an issue, the answer is nearly always - maintain low (to very low) insulin levels through diet." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "csrz8rx", "csrzd1o", "csrzdmw", "csrzl7v" ], "score": [ 2, 11, 2, 8 ], "text": [ "Fuss?? What fuss are you talking about? I'm not aware of any.\n\nAnyways, I see nothing wrong with what you've listed. Can you explain more??", "To some, Jesse Jackson is a Gadfly in the political scene here, using social issues for self promotion. He can typically be found inciting already high-tension racial events with his views, often before all the facts are truly known. Although he has been an influential member of the African American Civil Rights community, he has had some very high profile personal problems which have lowered his stature here in the US. Recently he did an AMA here which didn't go well, filled with rambling, incoherent statements and pretty much failed to answer questions.", "His AMA is possibly the reason for Victoria Taylor being fired which caused reddit to go into meltdown. \n\nUsers insulted him and called him a hate-filled race baiter in the top post. ", "Jesse Jackson is a prominent civil rights activist and minister. He worked with Dr. King during the 60's civil rights struggle for black Americans. This is true and legitimate.\n\nHowever, he is also known for race baiting and injecting himself into any media-friendly issue that deals with black people. He extorts peo ppl me and business in exchange for not calling for boycotts. He tends to inflame racial tensions rather than working toward reconciliation. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cbl9o9m", "cbl9ori", "cbl9swi", "cbl9vxg" ], "score": [ 23, 3, 13, 9 ], "text": [ "You are innocent until proven guilty at trial.\n\nBail--or lack thereof--is to ensure you get to trial", "I'm guessing it's because they can't take the risk. I mean, if there was someone charged with killing, like, 20 people, would you really want him out on the streets, *just because he might be innocent*? No. You'd want him safely locked up in jail until there is sufficient evidence to *prove* his innocence.\n\n", "Two words: Flight risk. If the guy is the kingpin of a multinational drug smuggling ring, of course he's not going to stay for trial. If he gets bail he'll be in Mexico before you can say \"Hasta la vista\".\n\nWhereas, an accountant with two kids accused of investment fraud is probably not going to flee the country.", "Typically people are denied bail because they are considered a flight-risk (there is reason to believe they will try and escape to another jurisdiction to avoid prosecution) or because the person has a past history of not appearing in court when required to do so. Also, people who do not have a fixed address are often denied bail because there is a much higher risk that the court won't be able to locate them, if and when necessary.\n\nIn some Jurisdictions, bail may also be dependent on past criminal history, the seriousness of the crime and the possible risk to the community, but in most cases the primary consideration of whether bail should be granted basically comes down to how likely the accused is of voluntarily returning back to court when they are scheduled to appear for trial." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cxgs7xa", "cxgt69c", "cxgt6oy", "cxgtfdz", "cxgtj15", "cxgtykh", "cxh1n7t", "cxh7ghw", "cxhd4q2", "cxhi4zf", "cxhk8f7" ], "score": [ 147, 21, 8, 8, 4, 5, 21, 3, 2, 2, 6 ], "text": [ "You can't distract yourself from it anymore. It's just you and your head. This is why I got me some good sleeping pills.", "From an evolutionary standpoint, this was bred into us, it makes you more alert of surroundings to hopefully get you to make a better choice of when and where you go to sleep.", "It happens to me when I start getting tired, and I think it's because I'm just not as good at controlling my thoughts at this point. Not that I've been thinking of it all day, but my brain's just a jerk and knows it can get away with it at that point. ", "You should read The Organized Mind by Daniel Levitin! He does a good job of explaining this, and offers many ideas for resolving this issue and others.", "Thats what happens when you let your mind wander for an extended period. When you're doing something you have to keep your mind focused on that thing but when you're laying in your bed there is no distractions. ", "Will my schitzophrenic roommate burn the house down before she leaves at the end of the month?", "Emotional and cognitive avoidance is a strategy employed by us all, especially for worriers. Your guard lowers as you go to sleep (and during your sleep), and anxieties come through. There's a lot of work on mindfulness which looks at this - allowing emotions to drift in, and drift out, without us spending energy in fighting them. Check out work by Penman & Williams, Kabat-Zinn and John Teasdale for more.", "These are thoughts you have been suppressing throughout the day, but as you relax into sleep that necessitates undoing the suppression process.", "You are finally given a time where the millions of units of sensory information are not bombarding you and are simply alone with your mind; what you choose to focus on is up to you.", "ASMR really works for a good sleep. it gets you paying attention to the sound and not your anxieties", "For awhile I thought it was just me. I listen to podcast now, Adam Corolla, Joe Rogan, Greg Fitzsimmons, and even Hardcore History. Eventually I fall asleep. \n\nYou gotta work on the stuff that keeps you up though, little by little during the day. A little extra reading of my class textbook, a little homework way ahead of its due date, and a small list of things I need to for the next day to make it easier to sleep the following night. \n\nBasically, I was having goals, dreams, and passions and was doing nothing towards any of them for awhile. I sleep better when I feel accomplished. \n\nJust me anyways\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cm15kmq", "cm15pi6" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "Most cars have drive wheels and then a pair of wheels that just get pushed or pulled along. 4wd powers both so if one slips the other can pull /push it out ", "4x4 usually describes truck and SUV drive trains which can be turned on/off. Typically in a 4x4 vehicle the front wheels turn at the same speed as the rear wheels regardless of what the driver is doing; this makes it very difficult to turn since all the wheels are turning at the same speed. In a normal vehicle when you turn the outside wheels have to travel a longer distance than the inside wheels, your front wheels typically travel a different distance than your rear wheels as well. \n\nIn an AWD car there there are 3 differentials, one in the front that distributes power to the left and right wheels one in the center that distributes power between the front and rear wheels and one in the rear that distributes power between the 2 rear wheels. Depending on how sophisticated the system is each differential can adjust how much power goes to each side making turning easier." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cpbs7i1", "cpbsbkt", "cpbsj8t" ], "score": [ 2, 3, 4 ], "text": [ "Scientists are only guessing based on what they know. We know that every form of life we've ever seen or known about requires water, oxygen, etc, so we kinda work based on the assumption that *all* life requires these things until those beliefs are proven wrong.", "It's not that Planet X with the chlorine atmosphere can't support life. It's that it can't support *Earthlike* life. We know that in theory it's possible to have life in non-Earthlike circumstances, but we know definitively that Earthlike life is possible. For now, we're looking for Earthlike life just to narrow the search somewhat.", "Honestly, there could be a whole race of hydrogen-guzzling giants living on Jupiter. The only problem is that we don't know what hydrogen-breathing giants look like, how they affect their environment, what they're made up of, what they excrete, etc.\n\nSince we don't know any of that, there's really no way to look and a planet and *know* that there isn't life on it. But until we find a better way to check or learn a *lot* more about the universe, it's useless to go based on guesswork.\n\nEverything living that we've ever seen has developed on a planet that's not too hot, not too cold, with plenty of water and a rocky crust. So our best bet is just to look for more of that, because that way we've found something that we *know* could hold life." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cio91fg", "cio9ugl" ], "score": [ 6, 3 ], "text": [ "It's a reflex shared by all mammals, the same reason your cat/dog/rat loves when you pet it.\n\n\nYour skin has nerves at the end of the hair follicles that release endorphins when they are touched. It is evolutionary designed to promote social behavior like grooming ", "That's why whenever I see a little girl in pig tails, I yank on them. I've only been arrested for it twice." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ckhpu7e", "ckhqhtj" ], "score": [ 3, 4 ], "text": [ "I don't know if its been scientifically studied, but I would assume that running up stairs in the dark sets off a \"fight or flight\" response in your brain because it thinks that you're being chased by a predator, so it activates your sympathetic nervous system and releases adrenaline into your body, thus creating that chill. If you did some biometric tests, you'd probably find an elevated blood pressure, dilated pupils, and goosebumps", "Are the stairs heavily carpeted? The only time climbing stairs has ever felt weird to me is when the stairs have a very thick carpet on them. Makes my whole body feel strange." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cr4jg4p" ], "score": [ 4 ], "text": [ "There are usually 2 ways ISO can be adjusted in a digital camera.\n\nFirst, the signal from the individual pixels on the sensor are read through an electronic amplifier circuit with adjustable gain. Imagine this is like hooking up a microphone to a sound amplifier, and dialing the gain/volume dial. If the microphone signal is weak and quiet, you can crank up the amplifier and hear it loud, but the more you crank it, the more noisy it also becomes.\n\nThe signal from the camera sensor is amplified the same way. If very little light is being captured, the signal is weak, but can be amplified electrically, which is analogous to using a higher ISO film in a film camera. But the noise is also being amplified, resulting in noisier overall image. Each ISO setting on a digital camera typically corresponds to a different gain level on the signal amplifier circuit.\n\nHowever, many digital cameras can also adjust the ISO digitally beyond the limits of the amplifier circuit gain adjustment. This adjustment is done after the signal from the sensor has been captured and digitized (passed through analog to digital conversion) and is basically just a digital transformation of the individual pixel sensor readings/values.\n\nFor example you could simply multiply each sensor reading by 2 digitally to double the effective ISO. A pixel with brightness of say 100 would now show brightness of 200 - same as if you used a twice as sensitive film, or dialed in twice the gain in the amplifier circuit. Of course noise is still doubled as well." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dcgv01e" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "An mp3 file is compressed by a factor of about 10 (75 to 95% reduction in size) while a wav file is raw sound data." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ce6drl8", "ce6dvm6" ], "score": [ 2, 2 ], "text": [ "3D printing would allow for upgrading or enhancing them more frequently at significantly reduced cost, and also for obtaining new ones more affordably and frequently as they wear out, or for younger individuals, outgrown.", "Because 3D printing gives you the ability to heavily customize prosthetics for the individual user at a much lower cost. \n \nUsing traditional manufacturing methods, it's very time consuming and costly to modify the process to tailor the product for each customer. But with 3D printing all of this modification can be done on the computer model and then printed straight away - creating different parts does not require different tools." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dvmgj1i" ], "score": [ 11 ], "text": [ "Very basically, most of the work in a group is done by a small amount of people in that group. You'll hear the 80/20 principle which means that 80% of of the work comes from 20% of the people. If you think about your workplace or school projects, there are a few individuals 20% that perform and complete most of the tasks, and the other 80% add marginally, and in some cases not at all.\n\nYour example in the other thread is saying 90% of the work is done by 10% of the workers. And then they needlessly complicated it by throwing in square roots and other terminology." ] }

[]

[ "https://www.reddit.com/r/customhearthstone/comments/8405h5/these_new_mechanics_sure_are_sweet/?st=JEPKFLRZ&amp;sh=d7328676" ]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dbr76em", "dbr77mr", "dbr8nbi", "dbrqddi" ], "score": [ 3, 26, 8, 3 ], "text": [ "They can't, but they are the head of the executive branch, which is in charge of actually doing things. So, they have a lot of leeway to do things that are hard to undo. \n\nExample, once they declare something a National Monument, it sets things in motion that are hard to undo, or some small agreements with foreign governments can take place within the restrictions of an existing treaty that require negotiation with that foreign government to then undo. For example, if the USA has an ecology agreement with Canada and then both countries decide to use that treaty to set aside Arctic land for preservation, one side can't just decide to change their mind later.", "They are permanent in the sense that if left as-is, they have not expiration date. They can still be modified by congressional action.\n\nFrom what I've read on the subject, another sitting president cannot undo the action because it is based on powers deligated to the President by law, and those deligated powers only provide for establishing these regions, not removing them. ", "This question has been posted before and deleted. Here was my response then:\n\nBasically the Outer Continental Shelf Act was designed to claim jurisdiction of submerged lands in the outer shelf and to authorize the Executive branch to lease the lands (generally assumed for drilling, etc).\n\nThe act gives the President the ability to withdraw lands from being leased. Essentially, imagine a large set of land, the government comes in and says, this is under our jurisdiction and we can lease it out as we please. A small portion of the bill says the President can decide if lands (under certain circumstances) shouldn't be leased and pulled from the pool to be leased by the federal government. The Act doesn't clearly define that the President is allowed to change his mind and lands they pulled from the pool could be leased in the future by the same or a different President. Because of this, some politicians and environmental activists say Obama's actions to pull this land from the lease pool is permanent and you'd need to rewrite the act in order to give Trump authority to allow this land to be leased in the future. Since Republicans don't have a fillibusterproof Congress the assumption is they won't be able to get enough Democrats to vote to change this bill and allow the land to be released for leasing again. In reality, it's a bit of a gray area. Nobody has ever challenged this in court, so there is no legal precedent to follow here. But it's also a bit of a dangerous one. If this plays out the way Democrats want it also means that essentially any authority Trump uses during his Presidency can't be undone by the next president without an act of Congress, which is a bit of a stretch and I'm sure they wouldn't want that.\n\nSo there's a couple ways this can go. Trump can issue an executive order allowing the lands to be leased and a contract awarded to an entity for drilling, etc.\n\nOnce this happens one of two things will occur after a series of events takes place. Before there is any permanent outcome you'd first have to find someone with legal standing of damages to sue Trump in court. If you can even find someone who has legal standing, which is a pretty big if, you'd then have to go through the court system potentially up to the Supreme Court which is where one of two things happen.\n\nOPTION ONE. Trump loses his case and won't be able to issue leases from Presidentially protected lands going forward. The leases issued for the lands in question prior to the judgement will most likely remain since the government engaged in a contract with a third-party. It is not the third-party's fault the government broke their own protocol. They'd either keep their contract or would be eligible for damages. Most likely they'd just keep the lease.. the same as the \"DREAMers\" who were given benefits from Obama illegally until the courts shut it down. They got to keep their benefits, the courts just stopped Obama from continuing to violate the law further. Obama and Democrats knew that would happen which is why they overstaffed those agencies and had a huge push to get as many signed up as possible before the courts shut them down. And then even after the first court order they continued anyway until they were threatened with criminal action if they continued. They claimed it was a \"mistake\" that they continued anyway.\n\nAnywho, if the courts shut down Trump on this the Democrats would have now just set a legal precedent that a new President cannot undo a legal Executive Order from a previous president unless the law EXPLICITLY states they have the authority to change their mind. The vast majority of our laws are not set up this way. This means Trump's presidential legacy would be permanent < something I can't imagine anybody wants > and this land would likely continue to be drilled on anyway since the permits were provided. Very short sighted on their part.\n\nOPTION TWO. Trump wins and can do whatever he wants as he has done anyway, only now Obama and Democrats suffer another demoralizing political defeat.\n\nAlso, there's nothing stopping Canada from drilling in their coastal waters and taking out the oil from their land. The oil reserves breach the lands of both countries and can be drained from either side. So basically, Canada reserves the right to drill and take the oil themselves anyway. Long story short, this really doesn't matter all that much unless it gets to a point where the courts decide a new President can't overrule a previous President unless the law explicitly states they have said right to do so.\n\nThis whole thing is also very hypocritical coming from a President who has made statements that he didn't have the authority to do certain things and then says when Congress doesn't pass the laws he wants or doesn't move fast enough he intentionally violates the law/constitution to pass a \"new law\" via executive order. Such as the \"DREAM Act\" or making recess appointments when Congress wasn't in recess. He has had more unanimous Supreme Court decisions against him and his executive power grabs than any President in my lifetime and his taunt to his political opponents has always been \"So sue me.\" Now that he is leaving office he is saying every decision he makes is for all eternity and nobody can possibly ever overrule it.", "The president cannot create \"permanent *legislation*.\" Only Congress can create laws. The president can, however, issue Executive Orders which may or may not have the apparent effect of a law, in some circumstances. But issuing said Executive Orders does not mean they will necessarily be carried out. A good example would be President Obama's Executive Order in 2009 closing the Detainee Center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. While he had the authority to issue such an order, as president he lacked the power to create the funding needed to implement it. Only Congress could do that, and they refused. As a result, here we are, 8 years later, and Camp Delta is still in operation." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ca2wx55", "ca2wyoe" ], "score": [ 5, 4 ], "text": [ "Imagine a tornado as a giant vacuum cleaner from the sky. Yes it would absolutely pick a person up and not only carry them some distance, but also eventually throw them free of the vortex and send them flying through the air even further. While flying through the vortex, your body would be constantly hit with the flying debris that makes a tornado visible (a tornado that formed over a completely paved area that was free of all dust, dirt, and anything else would be invisible to the naked eye). The force of the wind of a tornado has the ability to take a piece of straw from the ground and push it through a telephone pole without bending the straw (I've seen it), so you can imagine what all that dust, rocks, etc would do to a soft human body. ", "A tornado can pick up a cow. In fact, it can uproot trains and foundations from houses. They absolutely can pick up a human being." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cxzz2ea" ], "score": [ 7 ], "text": [ "Sand, gravel, and other particle materials have a natural *angle of repose* -- the slope at which (or below which) a pile of that material will be stable.\n\nIf you dump that material from a tube or conveyor, it will make a pile at exactly that angle as you can see [here.](_URL_0_) it has a sharp point.\n\nThe wind doesn't drop things from a single point, it pushes along a wide area, so what you get is a wide point -- the shape of a crease." ] }

[]

[ "https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5753/20091750824_1be544ac91_o.jpg", "https://www.reddit.com/r/EarthPorn/comments/3wn6bt/out_in_the_desert_in_western_namibia_19201280/" ]

[ [ "http://thumb101.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/175768/175768,1223815629,3/stock-photo-crushed-stone-pouring-off-an-elevated-conveyor-onto-a-large-pile-18761950.jpg" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cnqqjf2", "cnqqpsj", "cnqwai7" ], "score": [ 32, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "The observable universe has nothing to do with our current technological capabilities. We see by detecting light that bounces off whatever were looking at. The observable universe is what we are capable of viewing based on this principle. As light takes time to travel we cannot see light that has not yet reached us. The border between light that can reach us and light that can not yet reach us marks the edge of the observable universe.\n\nThis is also complicated by the fact that the universe is expanding, which basically means that the observable universe is also expanding and is therefore not constant.\n\n Think of it this way. if I'm holding a gun and point it at you and shoot you square in the face, the bullet would represent light and I would represent the object emitting/reflecting said light towards you. This would be an example of a constant universe. \n\nHowever our universe is expanding faster than the speed of light. Now imagine you put me on a train moving away from you faster than the bullet is travelling towards you. The bullet would never reach you. \n\nHowever this is further complicated by the fact that as the universe expands away from us, we also expand towards it. So now imagine you're a very fast runner and as I'm on the train I try to shoot you in the face, now imagine you begin running towards the bullet. Eventually you would reach the bullet and thus have been shot square in the face. \n\nHope this helps.", "Very strong telescopes, and a long time.\n\nLight doesn't just die out--as long as it doesn't hit anything and get scattered, light just keeps going. The further you are from something, the more spread out the light gets, so the harder it is to see. But as long as there's *some* light, it's not impossible.\n\nAnd space is just that--space. There's a lot of matter out there, but most of it is collected in galaxies and stars, so as long as you're not looking right into our own galaxy, you can see light that's traveled for billions of years without hitting anything.\n\nOf course, this light is extremely faint, so we need big telescopes to collect as much of it as possible. And to do that, we also take very long exposures. The [Hubble Deep Field](_URL_0_) was taken over the course of ten days, with over 300 separate images. This lets us collect enough light to make some of the most distant images we've ever seen.", "The best answer I can come up with is: by definition. What makes this part of the universe 'observable' is precisely that we can observe it.\n\nGiven that *you* look at things, you would assume that this is an active thing, but observation devices (eyes, telescopes,...) are actually just capturing light which has been emitted (or reflected) by the observed object. New technology does not allow us to look further, but to look with more accuracy. Think of it as a short-sighted person: they can see as far as someone else, but beyond a certain point, all they see is an indistinct blur. This is pretty much the same thing here: light from distant galaxy clusters have always hit our naked eyes, but the resolution of our eyes (and the *many* interferences in they way) doesn't let us discern it as spatial super telescope could.\n\nAs such, the observable universe hasn't changed, we are just able to see it clearer.\n\nHowever, as time passes, the light from distant objects finally manages to reach us, so technically, it gets bigger and bigger at exactly the speed of light. Add to that the fact that the universe is expanding, and the observable universe *does* change, but although this adds many complications, it does not radically changes the core of the problem (and given the ridiculous vastness of space, doesn't make a big difference on short timeframes, such as since humanity has walked this earth).\n\nStars emit light in all directions, and the light continues its course in straight line for ever. If the light had the time to travel between its source and earth since it appeared, it can be observed, and is therefore in the observable universe.\n\nExoplanets are very hard to see because they don't emit light and simply reflect a tiny bit of it, so we cannot observe them from earth in the current state of technology. This tiny amount of light *does* reach us however, so they are part of the observable universe; with enough technology, we might one day be able to discern it. However, a star 10^100 light years away is too far, and *cannot* physically be observed, even with the biggest telescope of all time: its light has simply never reached us. It's outside the observable universe.\n" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field#mediaviewer/File:HubbleDeepField.800px.jpg" ], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "etjs8sf", "etjs9w4", "etjsjn0", "etjss4v", "etk5ygs" ], "score": [ 4, 2, 10, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "The main difference is the type of compression. Wavs are typically uncompressed, so they have much larger filesizes than MP3s of the same length. \n\nMP3s use lossy compression. That means the file size is much smaller, but it loses a bit of quality. However much of the data that's thrown away is supposedly imperctible to humans anyway, so MP3s are fine for the casual listener.\n\nThere are other formats like FLAC which use lossless compression. That means the file size is smaller than an uncompressed wav, but no data is thrown away, it's just represented in a more compact form.\n\nSo there is a cost from converting to a lossy format, or from one lossy format to another. Every time you do the conversion you lose some quality, so after a few conversions it will sound pretty bad.", "WAV is lossless, which is its main advantage. It doesn't remove anything from the file. But because of this it's bigger.\n\nMP3 is lossy. It cuts some frequencies and then compresses the file some more. This results in smaller size, but obviously loss in quality.\n\nIf you covert WAV to MP3 you will lose some data. If you convert MP3 to WAV you won't change that much.", "In some cases, the extensions indicate the container types and not necessarily what is in them. Most times, like in the example case, the extension indicates the types of CODEC (file compression) was used to reduce the audio. The [MP3 uses MPEG1 (or 2) Audio Level 3](_URL_1_) but the [WAV is a container type that could house different audio types](_URL_0_). A good playback app will just read the header to determine what's inside.\n\nTheoretically, you could have MP3 compressed audio in a WAV file.\n\nThat said, converting from one CODEC to the other is bad, m'kay. This is because during the compression phase, a good portion of the original data was thrown away, never to return. And each time you run a compressed audio file through a CODEC--even the same CODEC--you will lose additional data and the quality will be degraded [even more].", "WAV files are \"raw\" files, meaning they have not been compressed to save space. They are usually an accurate representation of whatever sound is in that file (a song, someone talking, a bird, etc). They might take up 10 megabytes or more of space for each minute of audio.\n\nMP3 is not a raw format, but a compressed one. MP3 takes whatever audio is in the source (could be a WAV, or a CD, or recording music at a concert) and using various formulas, \"throws away\" parts of the audio in order to save space. This is usually high frequencies that humans cannot hear as easily, but other \"compressed\" formats (M4A, WMA, etc) might have different formulas as well. A medium-quality MP3 might take 1 megabyte of space for each minute of audio.\n\nGoing from one file type to another is called \"transcoding\". You can make MP3s out of WAV files by getting rid of some of the audio information. You could make a WAV out of an MP3, but you would then have a \"raw\" copy of a file that has missing information.", "A file extension is just metadata for it's file which happens to be present in the filename; It isn't necessary to be read properly. If your computer knows what codec or encryption technique (with appropriate keys) was used, the extension means essentially nothing. You ever notice how you can read .txt and .html files the same?\n\n\nAnyway - yes, you can convert from one codec to the other; WAV is lossless as everyone has already explained in these comments. I have tried to find a table online which shows you which ones you can convert to and from without loss but I was unable to. Here's my one:\n\n\n\nCONVERTING TO:\n\nMP3, WMA, AAC, OGG \n\n\nWill always lose quality. \n\n\n\nCONVERTING TO:\n\n\nFLAC, ALAC, AIFF, WAV\n\n\nWill never lose quality.\n\n\n\nQUIRKS:\n\n\n\n.WAV will clip your file if you are trying to make it 4gb or bigger - it uses a 32 bit int for it's header. \n\n\n\n\nOn the off chance that, by \"cost\", you mean monetary - no; free converters exist from this to that no matter what." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAV", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3" ], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ch1ljv0" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "The best explanation I've heard: Alcohol lowers your inhibition but can also lower your ability to regulate your feelings. Basically a feeling that might otherwise be quelled by the prefrontal cortex (that front bit of your brain) is left unchecked.\n\n [link!](_URL_0_)" ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labile_mood" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cejghs2" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Most likely sense of smell. Dog's noses are incredibly more sensitive than ours, and a lot more of their brains goes to processing odors.\n\nTheir sleeping brain detects a familiar scent, and that's enough to wake them up and make them investigate. And it doesn't matter whether the windows are up, because cars are not air-tight and enough scent still gets in for the dog to be able to detect it." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dl8azco" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "It dissolves the ear way better than water. OTOH, there are some recommendations that you not do this unless the was has formed a clog in your ear." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dsbn1j8", "dsbv8j0" ], "score": [ 5, 3 ], "text": [ "When wet? -\n\nA water droplet (or moisture) can absorb the ink in the paper. It then soaks into the paper (through capillary action) and as it travels the heavier larger in colors absorbed in the water get left behind and the smaller ink molecules make it further down the paper filter. This is called paper chromatography. Each color mixed into the black ink is a different size molecule. \n\nWhen in sunlight -\n\nOn an office inkjet printer, black ink is made by combining a bunch of colors together. Certain colors require absorbing more energy from a photon - who h leads to them breaking down first. The remaining colors are what you might see. ", "Some cheaper color printers don't have black ink, instead they use a combination of the other colors to print in black. \n\nSince those different inks fade at different rates, some colors will wind up being more prominent than others over time." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cnm2gff", "cnm2giz", "cnm2yvf" ], "score": [ 6, 2, 3 ], "text": [ "\"Halal is often used in reference to foods, i.e. foods that are permissible for Muslims to eat or drink under Islamic Shariʻah.\" - Wikipedia \n\nPeople are boycotting halal-certified restuarants because of their racist notions of terrorrism.", "Halal is Arabic for \"permitted\". In this context, they're referring for foods that comply with Islamic dietary laws. It's the Islamic equivalent of Kosher. The only association with terrorism is that it's something followed by religious Muslims. ", "Halal, in common English parlance, is essentially the Muslim equivalent of Kosher for Jews; a restaurant needs to be halal certified for Muslims to be able to eat there (in general). Some people want to ban it as part of general anti-Muslim sentiment.\n\nA slightly less bigoted reason some people don't like halal has to do with the way animals are butchered: by cutting the animal's throat and bleeding them out. Some people claim that it's inhumane and causes undue suffering in the animal before it dies, but that conclusion isn't totally supported by medical science." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c86r062" ], "score": [ 10 ], "text": [ "The answers that are here already are good, but there's a simpler way to say it:\n\nYou use a different equation to describe any situation in which the value of a thing is related to the rate of change of that thing relative to something else.\n\nThis is the easiest example I can think of: I'm going to drop a watermelon from a great height. How fast will it be falling after five seconds?\n\nIf watermelons fell at a fixed rate, this would be a trivial problem. The speed of the falling watermelon after five seconds would just be the speed of any falling watermelon at any time. But watermelons don't fall at a fixed rate; they fall at an *accelerating* rate. Meaning how fast a watermelon is falling depends on how long it's been falling.\n\nSo to describe this situation mathematically, and get our answer, we have to use a differential equation. It's the simplest possible differential equation: v = a t.\n\nHere v is the speed of the falling watermelon, in feet per second say, while a represents the acceleration of a falling watermelon. Acceleration is the *derivative* — that is, the rate of change — of speed with respect to time. So we can see that this equation relates a thing — v — to the rate of change of that thing — a — relative to something else — t. If you know a, you can multiply by *any* t to find out how fast the watermelon will be falling after t seconds.\n\nAs I said, that's the simplest possible differential equation. What about a slightly more complex one? What if I asked you *how far* the watermelon will fall in five seconds? Again, if watermelons fell at a fixed rate, that'd be easy: just multiply the rate times five seconds, and that'll give you the distance traversed after five seconds. But as we already established, watermelons *don't* fall at a fixed rate. Meaning the distance traversed over a given time by a falling watermelon is dependent on the rate of change of the watermelon's position — that is, the speed at which it's falling — but that in turn is dependent on the rate of change of the watermelon's speed — that is, the acceleration of a falling watermelon.\n\nIn this case, our equation is a bit more complex: x = 1/2 a t ². The distance traversed by the falling watermelon, x, is half of the acceleration times the square of the time it's been falling. In this equation we're relating a thing — distance fallen — to the rate of change *of the rate of change* of that thing. That makes this a *second-order* differential equation.\n\nBut it's still not very complicated, is it? There are *much* more complicated differential equations out there, but they all follow the same basic principle: When the value of a thing depends on the rate of change of that thing, welcome to Differential Equationville, population: you." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c5kohur", "c5koktg" ], "score": [ 3, 2 ], "text": [ "First, a little A & P lesson:\n\nYour lungs have little pockets in them called *[alveoli](_URL_0_)* and you have **a lot** of them in your lungs (about 700 million). When you breathe in, oxygen fills these pockets and comes *really* close to your blood. When your blood cells ([hemoglobin](_URL_1_)) comes by, it gives the pocket some carbon dioxide and takes oxygen.\n\nYour lungs always have a little bit of water in them (along with other stuff, called *[surfactant](_URL_2_)*) to stop your lungs from sticking together. Even the air that you breathe is between 1-4% water. But when a lot of water (or anything) gets into your lungs, it means that these little pockets can't work as well. This means your blood can't get rid of the carbon dioxide and it can't get more oxygen.\n\n* Your body has 700 million alveoli\n* You can cough, which works really well. The place where your left and right lung split (the [carina](_URL_3_)) makes you cough the strongest.\n* Your blood vessels can suck some of the water out of your lungs\n\nThe big problems come during:\n\n* Drowning: You're forced to breathe in a whole bunch of water\n* Unconsciousness: You lose the ability to cough\n* High blood pressure/Heart failure: Your alveoli can't drain properly and starts to collect in your lungs", "When water comes into your air tube, your body will seal it to prevent you from having too much much water in your lungs. In the end, you end up with no oxygen left, and this reflex end, so lot of water in your lungs and death.\n\n > How much water does it take to kill you?\n\nPossibly very little - this is called \"dry drowning\" : with even little water your air tube will be sealed and you can die from this.\n\n\n*(Not so LY5)* Another thing is osmosis : when you have a liquid with high concentrations ( for instance, your blood has high concentration in K+, etc) and another with low concentration, separated by a semi-permeable membrane, liquid from the low concentrated solution go into the high concentrated liquid and stuff in the high concentrated liquid goes into the less concentrated liquid. In the end, the two liquids separated are the same. \n\nYour blood is water with lot of stuff. Water is water with no stuff. Your cells' skin is a semi permeable membrane. If it is sea water, it is water with more stuff than your blood. In either case the chemical composition of the blood will be very fucked up and this lead to cardiac failure in 2-3 minutes (fresh water) or 8-10 minutes (salt water)\n\nSource: wikipedia." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulmonary_aveolus", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/hemoglobin", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulmonary_surfactant", "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carina_of_trachea" ], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "dkmcp16" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Free divers (people that dive down long distances) have tricks to dive deep. To keep the oxygen inside them for longer, they take advantage of something called the divers reflex. The divers reflex slows your heart rate, it's activated by jumping into cold water. Another thing they may do is hyperventilating before they jump in [DON'T TRY THIS, IT'S DANGEROUS]. Hyperventilating before let's you lower your level of co^2 which is something your body needs to get rid of when you hold your breath. When you breath your body get's rid of co^2 and takes in oxygen. Your body builds up co^2 quicker than it's need for oxygen. By lowering the levels of co^2 before you jump in you can stay in until your oxygen runs out. Free divers also usually have very large lungs to hold in more air so they can stay underwater for longer. I'm not fully sure how they combat buoyancy but it definitely is a challenge. Here's a link that goes more in depth _URL_0_." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "https://www.deeperblue.com/effects-of-pressure-and-depth/" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ec18s9c", "ec1lvs3", "ec1n5j8" ], "score": [ 14, 17, 3 ], "text": [ "I have found a good portion of people also misdiagnose dandruff. Beyond the ideas that with more knowledge it is easier to determine if something is abnormal or not, many people often assume that dandruff is dandruff and not other causes such as dry scalp or something like psoriasis. \n\nI spent many years under the assumption that I had dandruff, and worked to treat the issue accordingly. I often never saw improvements. The issue is that I was treating dandruff which is often linked to a excess of oils on the scalp and the microscopic creatures that feed on it. I in fact had chronic dry scalp, which produces similar flakes. ", "**One word: \"Repeat\"**\n\nThis is such a great question. The answer is \"No. It was not always that way. Common dandruff is a relatively new phenomenon\". And it's new on 2 fronts. \n\n1. Marketing. Some people have and had medical dandruff in decades past. Fungal infections and *seborrheic dematitis* can cause persistent dandruff. But it isn't common and didn't used to be such a big social issue. But much like Listerine created the stigma of \"halitosis\" by making up a name for a disease and fearmongering that \"[you might be unpopular because of your bad breath](_URL_0_)\" — Proctor and Gamble also created the social stigma of \"flakes\" and \"never wear black without the blue\". \n\n2. Also Marketing. But the real interesting bit is that rates of common, non-medical dandruff have increased sharply. \n\nDandruff is dead skin that dries out and flakes off. It's not dry as in non-wet with water, but non wet with *oil*. Oil is what keeps the protective layer of dead skin on your scalp from getting flaky. \n\nHow does all the oil come out? Well, surfactants like soap make oil soluble in water. So when you shampoo your hair, you dry your scalp out a little. \n\nAnd when you shampoo your hair every day–you dry it out even more. And when you \"lather, rinse, repeat\" you dry it out a lot. A lot of people think their dandruff is caused by not shampooing enough—so they use even more. Which can make it worse. The truth is, dandruff can be caused by not shampooing enough, or by shampooing too much. \n\n[Most dermatologists recommend only shampooing 1–3 times a week](_URL_1_). But as a result of advertising, most Americans shampoo everyday, often twice in a row—a behavior targeted to sell more shampoo; with the side effect of causing dandruff, which in turn can sell *even more* shampoo. \n\nSo yes, more people have occasional dandruff now than in the past and it's because we're overwashing our scalps, using harsher products, and simply noticing it more. ", "Dandruff has been with us pretty much forever. [In the Middle Ages a fern was used to treat it](_URL_0_).\n\nPeople sometimes distinguish between different causes, oily skin, dry skin, other skin conditions such as psoriasis, etc, and while those distinctions are meaningful, the end result is more-or-less that same (the treatments are different though) and they’re all lumped together by outside observers.\n\nWhat may have changed are the causes for the condition." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/marketing-campaign-invented-halitosis-180954082/", "https://www.sciencealert.com/how-often-you-should-wash-your-hair-according-science" ], [ "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2181905" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "eiy0yyr" ], "score": [ 3 ], "text": [ "Well for starters you drinking adequate amounts of water is shown to help physical recovery, cognitive function. And just generally a necessity if you're a person who enjoys working out, or you live in a warm climate as you'll lose fluids by regulating your body temperature (sweating) and if you can't do so you'll quickly overheat and pass out." ] }

[]

[]

[ [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e4vuqru", "e4vx3hg" ], "score": [ 4, 3 ], "text": [ "Can I assume you actually mean from a United States perspective? Of course, Mexico is in North America as is Canada, and although I can't speak for the latter, varied foods definitely are eaten for breakfast in Mexico. (Two special offerings include pozole and menudo, but there are many others.)\n\nIt seems more likely that food preferences are related to food availability through history, but I'm sure someone who is well versed in cultural or biological anthropology can answer more definitively. But it's an interesting question!\n\nEdit: I know I did not answer the question but I hope that asking for a clarification of the question isn't against the rules. ", "My guess is it's more cultural than anything else, and in relation to that like u/aceecee said availability of resources. When travelling in Japan they have things like fish, pickled vegetables and rice for breakfast, it felt super strange to me, I couldn't get the thought 'this is dinner food' out of my head, probably from a lifetime of conditioning to western food. Definitely worth trying new things, might find your new favourite breakfast food.😊" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e1p9t2v", "e1pah5z", "e1pbez0", "e1petb3" ], "score": [ 5, 9, 5, 2 ], "text": [ "It is something similar to describing color. If you've never seen it, it'll be hard ho imagine. I can give it a shot though:\n\nI am going to assume you know the basics of *how* depth perception works. and skip the explanation. What happens is you're able to see how close or far away something is very easily. In pictures and videos, you can generally tell due to things your brain picks up on. When you see in real life, though, you can actually see that depth instead of inferring it subconsciously. Things physically stick out towards you.\n\nI hope that explains it well enough", "If you have an iPhone X or know someone who does, there's an app called The Parallax View that simulates depth perception by tracking your head and eyes. Super easy to use—change the settings to track one eye, open that eye only, and move the phone and/or your head. It creates the illusion of 3d stereoscopic vision. ", "Take a look at the top split depth gifs on /r/SplitDepthGIFS/ to get a sense of what depth feels like. These gifs simulate depth perception: having knowledge of how far away something is by just looking at it. The white lines act as a fixed depth that get \"crossed\" when something in the image goes over it, making it look like it's closer.", "The best way i can describe it is it's more of a sense of how far something is. As one example i will use my monitor, when i reach for it i can \"tell\" how far it is and how far my arm has to go to touch it. But when i close one eye i have a hard time telling how far it is, it feels kind of like my view went \"2D\" (its hard to explain) and if i were to reach for it,i may or may not touch it, or i could reach for it and go to far and jam my finger into it. it just helps me to reach my monitor and not miss it or punch it because i calculated the distance wrong. \n\nI hope this helps in some way." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cgy6eyi", "cgy7db2", "cgy7hq4", "cgy7v74", "cgy8eeq" ], "score": [ 4, 3, 3, 3, 3 ], "text": [ "It's a long-term process. Studios recoup money gradually from domestic and international sales, then DVD and streaming video sales, along with any kind of merchandising, and so on. \n\nEveryone involved in making the movie has already been paid, so the only people affected are the ones who financed the film.", "When a movie is made 90% of people have already been paid unless their contract is based off ticket sales. That's why a movie loses money when they can't recoup the tickets but there is a lot of money to be made off foreign markers, dvd sales, and rentals. Movies have to really bad to not make back their money.", "The studio making the movie puts up the money up front. It goes to the actors, film crew, director, sets, travel, etc etc. If the movie made 11.1 million dollars and then disappeared off the face of the earth, then the studio would lose money. \n\nHowever, the movie will get released in foreign markets, so they'll make some money there. Then released to DVD and Bluray and make more money. If the movie ends up on Netflix, more money. Redbox or any other Video on Demand services bring in more money. If there was product placement (a character drinking a Pepsi, or driving a Hyundai), more money. \n\nThe studio can also sell the rights to the film, giving some other company control over it. \n\nIt's possible for a movie that bombs to cause the studio to go bankrupt or even close. ", "Everyone involved has already been paid, that's why it cost $100M to make.\n\nAt some level, somebody is losing money although not as much as you might think. Let's say it cost $5M to record the sound. That's not a $5M check to a sound company, that's $5M being paid to the sound division of the studio that is making the movie.\n\nThis sort of \"Hollywood Accounting\" can result in successful movies that don't look like they made any profit.", "The only people who don't see the benefit of the film making more than it's budget are those who are getting paid as a percentage of ticket sales (most people would have just been paid a lump sum) and those who have had to finance the costs of the production.\n\nBut it's really common for films to not actually make back the money put into their budget. This is why studios produce films like Transformers. They know that these films are just going to pander to the lowest common denominator of people with their simple good vs evil storylines and their piles of action. These films are not original, they are not inventive and usually they aren't well acted, they are just there to get lots and lots of sheeple to go to the cinema." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "ddwxwnd", "ddwzmtt" ], "score": [ 2, 3 ], "text": [ "It is theorized that the entire universe was infinitely small at one point. At that point of compression, your pen would no longer be shrinkable. It would not even be a pen. it would be smaller than a single quark. It would stop shrinking when it reached this singularity, and this singularity would be infinitesimal.\n\nBut no, \"we\" can do this to a pen. Not with our current technology, and probably not even with the technology we invent in the next 500 years.", "This is a current problem with computers. The chips can be made with smaller and smaller components, to a point. Electrons aren't actually in one *place* but rather a cloud of probability and when you get small enough parts, the possibility that an electron might be somewhere it isn't supposed to be matters.\n\nBut that's only somewhat relevant. More importantly, how are you \"shrinking\" your object? Are you simply manufacturing a smaller version of it? In that case, you're making a miniature copy of your pen and, like the computer chips, there's a point when it stops working. Your ink molecules need space to flow around each other so they can eventually flow out of the pen to write with. The smallest you can make your pen and call it a pen is when it's too small for your ink to flow, which would be (relative to the scale of the microscopic universe) pretty big. If you wanted to make an even smaller \"pen-shaped object\" or something that *acts* like a pen but isn't truly a ink pen, you could go smaller, but again you have to define a \"pen\". Take a pencil instead, and define \"writing\" with it as leaving behind some carbon as you scratch it. Theoretically you could make that pencil as small as the diameter of six carbon atoms in a ring, stacked on top of each other (basically single rings of [graphene](_URL_1_) stacked on top of each other).\n\nYou could also define \"shrinking\" as removing the space between the atoms in your pen. Atoms are [mostly empty space](_URL_2_) and you can *theoretically* remove a lot of that empty space and make your pen take up less space without changing how many atoms are in it. This poses a few problems, though. To remove the space you would have to squeeze the pen *really hard* to force the atomic nuclei closer together. When you put enough pressure on a liquid, it stops being a liquid. Your ink is going to stop working. You're also going to break a lot of the materials in the pen, and probably start forcing the various molecules in the pen to mix. You'd have less of a pen and more of a homogeneous blob of plastic, ink, and metal (and whatever else was in the pen). Also, the electrons start acting weird, since their orbitals around their atomic nuclei are overlapping.\n\nAt some point, when you keep squeezing, the molecules stop being defined and break apart into their constituent elements. Keep squeezing and you start fusing those elements together into one larger element. We're already squeezing much harder than anything on Earth could possibly manage! This is the kind of squeezing that goes on in the cores of massive stars - even our own star isn't massive enough to fuse anything heavier than helium.\n\nSqueeze even *harder*, though, and you do something *really* crazy: you force the electrons to be absorbed into their nuclei and turn all the protons into neutrons. There's nothing holding those neutrons together, though, except for whatever force you're using to squeeze them together (which is probably the gravity of a truly massive star). You've essentially fused your \"pen\" into a single blob of neutrons that, without looking it up and doing the math, I'm fairly confident would fit well inside the radius of an atom. No one knows how this stuff (commonly called [neutronium](_URL_3_)) behaves since we can't make it on Earth (not even close) and the only place you can find it is in neutron stars, which have thousands of times more mass than our own Sun, shoved into the space of a few tens of kilometers - an entire star's worth of matter shoved into a [space smaller than NYC](_URL_4_). So it's not exactly something we could just casually observe, is what I'm saying, even assuming we had the technology to go fly to one.\n\nCompress it even further and...no one knows what happens. We already don't know what happens. It's weird. But let's imagine a magical device that completely ignores what your pen is made of and simply makes *everything* in the pen smaller without mucking about with the weird physics involved in that.\n\nThere is still a theoretical limit on how small *anything* can be, at all, ever, and that is the [Planck Length](_URL_0_). The Planck Length is defined by a bunch of math, but the significance is that if there's anything smaller than the Planck Length, it can't be measured, or observed. Not: \"We don't currently have the technology to do so\"; rather, it *cannot be measured*, ever. The laws of the universe don't allow it. To explain this, imagine you're measuring something - you need a ruler, something to compare it to. But your measurement can only be as accurate as your \"ruler\", so if you have a ruler that only shows you one foot, you can only measure something as being \"less than one foot\" or \"one foot and some more?\" At the Planck Length, the foam of quantum space is already bigger than whatever you're measuring. There's nothing you can compare it to. If it's smaller than that, you can't know how small it is except that it's *at least* as small as the Planck Length.\n\nSo that's your hard answer: nothing can be smaller than the Planck Length. Or at least, if it is smaller it doesn't matter, the smallest you can measure it to be, given literally any level of technology and science, is the Planck Length. To give you a sense of scale on that, a tiny grain of sand is about halfway between the size of the entire observable universe (93ish billion lightyears in diameter) and the Planck Length. It's many orders of magnitude smaller than the smallest particles that we know of. So you've got a long ways to go.\n\nAs /u/pseudopad mentioned, the entire **observable** universe was once infinitesimally small. But that's not the same as infinitely small. It was as close to zero as possible without being zero. Probably. The problem is that everything we know about physics stops working long before you get to the Planck Length when you compact any amount of matter that much, not to mention compacting everything in the observable universe! But even our best guesses, pure speculation with not a lot of scientific evidence behind it, completely stop working that small." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [ "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length", "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/Graphen.jpg", "http://www.dingtwist.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/illusion-of-solidity.png", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutronium", "https://www.nasa.gov/images/content/629007main_Neutron_Star_on_Manhattan_large.jpg" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "fnsdzpc", "fnsf774" ], "score": [ 3, 9 ], "text": [ "Ultraviolet light has high enough energy that it is capable of damaging living things. This is why you get sunburn and why UV works as a disinfectant.", "UV has the ability to knock an electron free when it hits a molecule, this gives it the ability to break DNA apart. If you hit the DNA with enough UV you can break it apart enough that the cell can't patch it back together. This means the cell's instruction manual has been shredded and it can no longer build what it needs to continue existing and divide later\n\nThis kills the cell\n\nYou can use high levels of UV C to sterilize surfaces and kill all the bacteria and fungi on it" ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c2hgdbx", "c2hgdbx" ], "score": [ 26, 26 ], "text": [ "Ron Paul is a candidate for the US 2012 presidential nomination. While he lacks mainstream support compared to the other frontrunner Republican candidates (Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney), he is known for having a very substantial following on the internet. Reddit in particular is known for showing support for the candidate. This is where r/circlejerk comes in. As a subreddit known for lampooning the rest of Reddit's activities, they began making fun of Reddit's support of Ron Paul. As memes tend to do, the whole Ron Paul joke on r/circlejerk exploded, with many people submitting jokes. The moderators of r/circlejerk then ran with it, changing the subreddit's layout to reflect the great number of Ron Paul submissions. Now, due to the layout and the nature of r/circlejerk, the Ron Paul joke is hugely popular in r/circlejerk, and shows no signs of stopping (although, knowing how fickle Reddit can be, I'd say that it doesn't have too much longer).", "Ron Paul is a candidate for the US 2012 presidential nomination. While he lacks mainstream support compared to the other frontrunner Republican candidates (Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, Mitt Romney), he is known for having a very substantial following on the internet. Reddit in particular is known for showing support for the candidate. This is where r/circlejerk comes in. As a subreddit known for lampooning the rest of Reddit's activities, they began making fun of Reddit's support of Ron Paul. As memes tend to do, the whole Ron Paul joke on r/circlejerk exploded, with many people submitting jokes. The moderators of r/circlejerk then ran with it, changing the subreddit's layout to reflect the great number of Ron Paul submissions. Now, due to the layout and the nature of r/circlejerk, the Ron Paul joke is hugely popular in r/circlejerk, and shows no signs of stopping (although, knowing how fickle Reddit can be, I'd say that it doesn't have too much longer)." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cqjpapl", "cqjpgvh", "cqjpj15", "cqjpj5f" ], "score": [ 8, 2, 3, 2 ], "text": [ "You can do this yourself easily. Just set the font to one with serifs.\n\nIt's not restricted to computers, in any case. Printed lower-case l and upper-case I have always looked identical in sans serif fonts.", "Because sans serif typefaces (the ones that look like plain lines without the accents on the ends of the letters) are designed to minimize space as much as possible. They are simple intentionally, and the 'I' and 'l' characters are just as simple. If you look at the typeface used for this comment you can see that it is distinguishable so really it's up to the font designer. ", "That is not a computer problem but a font problem.\n\nThe fonts used in modern computer are either based on or actually are fonts which pre-dates computers.\n\nTimes New Roman for example was created by the famous The Times Newspaper in 1931.\n\nNot all fonts used today have the l and the I looks identical.\n\nIn most cases it is assumed that people will be able to tell from context which was meant and in those contexts where both might be equally likely (semi random alphanumeric codes often only allow one or the other or treat them the same).", "One, it's not so much a problem with computers, but with fonts. In the early days, computers didn't come with multiple fonts, and most used [OCR-A](_URL_0_) or something similar. In that font, capital I and lowercase l look different. \n\nTwo, this is not that big of a problem as usually context will clue the user in as to whether or not it's an I or an l." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [], [ "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OCR-A_font" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cmk04e6", "cmk1k8a" ], "score": [ 3, 5 ], "text": [ "It has to do with the amount of amperage you are drawing out of one circuit. In my opinion its not safe to use cheap surge protectors at all, due to their low amperage range. Then plugging 6 poor surge protectors into the first poor surge protectors is just asking for electrical problems. At least, blowing a breaker. Hopefully not burning your house down. Do not do this for christmas lights...", "There are two basic stats to electricity that we are concerned with here - voltage and current. Imagine this like currency. Voltage will be like type of currency (dollars or pesos or whatnot) and current will the amount of money($10, $20, etc).\n\nEach outlet provides a certain voltage (gives out dollars). Everything plugged into it expects that voltage(wants dollars). Great! \n\n\nBut each outlet also has a maximum amount of current that can be drawn from it at once. So if an outlet is designed to allow 10 amps at a certain voltage (lets say $10), normally you can plug in any 2 things that want that voltage (dollars) and add up to 10 amps (perhaps 2 $5 items, or 1$7 and 1$3, or just 1 $10).\n\nNormally, things with normal plugs are limited to certain currents (costs), so that when you plug 2 in it will never overload the outlet.\n\nTheres enough extra room built in, and so many things are well below the max cost, that surge protectors can usually make these two outlets into 5 without much problem (most things cost under $2, so a $10 outlet most likely wouldn't have a problem if you plugged in 5 things. But if you have a couple expensive things in there, it could!).\n\nBut if you have multiple surge protectors that turn each side into 5 outlets, now you have ten outlets still on that $10 limit for the total cost. Putting even 7 normal, $2 items on this is now over your limit! your stuff costs $14, but you only have $10 to give. So you're trying to give some things less money then they asked for. Some just wont work when that happens, but some will get mad and break things. In addition, you're asking for $14 down a path only meant for $10. It can't all fit at once so depending on how far over you are sometime it will just only let the $10 through, and sometimes it will clog up (blow a fuse) and NOTHING will go through till you fix that fuse. Fuses dont solve all problems though, so dont think oh the worst that can happen is I blow a fuse. Thats a common result, but another common result is fire and damaged devices. \n\n\n\n\nAs a side note, on the voltage having to be the same, those big blocky square plugs like mosts phones and handhelds and chargers and whatnot have are transformers, which solve the different voltage problems. The turn 1 amp at 10v (1 euro) into 2amps at 5v (2 dollars). They're like a money changer. If you didn't have those for something that didn't want the voltage your outlet is at, you'd have a big problem. You'd be trying to give it the wrong currency and it would refuse it (unless it's really lenient and you're really close, but most times it will just cause a problem). This can either just make it not work(refuse), or make it blow up (get mad and destroy things)." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "e5h3ncs" ], "score": [ 2 ], "text": [ "Florida native here! (That doesn't necessarily give me more credibility to answer your question, I just think more people should be at least somewhat proud to be from here.) Basically, those southern regions of Florida were never very Southern to begin with.\n\nUntil the early 20th century, the vast majority of peninsular Florida was sparsely populated frontier and swampland. Since the historic population centers of Florida were in the less swampy and more easily accessible panhandle and northern sections of the peninsula, the cultural traditions of the rest of the American South were able to take root and flourish there. \n\nThe construction of major railways through peninsular Florida in the 1910s made it much easier to traverse, but it wasn't until the great [land boom](_URL_1_) of the 1920s that the state started to become much more populated. During that time, shrewd real estate speculators with dubious scruples began buying up and developing land in South Florida, and to a lesser extent, the Gulf Coast and South-Central Florida. They then heavily advertised Florida in the Northeast and Midwest population centers as a pristine tropical paradise, to the point that most of the people moving into these new developments were from those areas. What those new residents found when they got here was often...less than what had been advertised. (Think houses literally sinking into the swamp.) \n\nIn any case, the massive speculation created a bubble that inevitably popped, and the whole thing went sideways around the time of the Depression. Population growth dropped off significantly after that, but by that time, cities like Miami, West Palm Beach, Tampa, and Orlando had been well established, populated mostly by former Northerners. When economic times got better, that migration pattern mostly continued, with those cities becoming prime destinations for retiring Northerners post-WWII. The construction of the Orlando theme parks beginning in the 1970s and growth of tourism as the state's primary industry made Florida a top destination for people from up north, many of whom decided to return here for good. \n\nAs an aside, the whole Florida land boom really was an interesting time in the state's history. I highly recommend [\"Oh, Florida!\"](_URL_0_) by Craig Pittman for more on this and other interesting bits of Florida history and current affairs." ] }

[]

[]

[ [ "https://www.amazon.com/Oh-Florida-Americas-Weirdest-Influences/dp/1250071208", "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_land_boom_of_the_1920s" ] ]

{ "a_id": [ "eso58ax", "esqef3a" ], "score": [ 4, 2 ], "text": [ "Everything was very community based, and most solutions arose out of need, not governance. \n\nWhat I mean is, a community needed law enforcement, so they hired the best person for the job and called him sheriff. He deputized folks he thought were good for the job, and boom. You have a police force. \n\nThis is why Sheriffs (in most cases) are elected. It is a community driven service.", "This is better in r/askhistorians." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "c8plv8j", "c8pwmul", "c8px1xu" ], "score": [ 14, 2, 2 ], "text": [ "A monk takes his vows and commits to a particular self-sufficient community consisting only of monks. He serves the church through devotion.\n\nA friar takes his vows and commits to a larger area, a province, and is supported through donations. They will usually travel about their area and stay in a variety of places in the province they are committed to. He serves the church by working among laypeople.\n\nA priest can be a friar, monk, or neither. He is an ordained member of the church which means he can perform rites and rituals such as giving mass, performing marriages, and giving last rites, things that a non ordained friar or monk cannot do.", "Monks belong to one kind of religious order, an important part of this type of religious order is \"stability\" staying in one place. So they're very much devoted to a life of prayer in a small community and not really out in the world much. These communities are mostly self-supporting. This means there is usually some kind of community work that pays for the expenses of the community (many make beer or jams or other products like this).\n\nFriars belong to a different kind of religious order. The most important thing about these religious orders (which have more variation among them than the type of religious orders that monks belong to) is that they beg for the money to support themselves. This naturally involves them being more involved with the community typically than a monk would be.\n\nBoth friars and monks take vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience. They do not have individual property (everything is owned in common, though sometimes this can be a fair amount of property/money). They promise not to marry and seek to live chastely. They are all committed to obedience. There is a \"superior\" in each religious order which they must obey in all things not contrary to good morals. The superior in turn is obedient to some other religious authority (depending on the structure of the order).\n\nThere are two types of priests. One is a member of a religious order and thus either a monk or friar (one can be a lay brother, that is a non-priest monk or brother as well). The other type is called a \"secular\" priest. A secular priest does not make the three vows, but does live some of the realities of the three vows in different ways. He also promises not to marry. He can own personal property but makes a promise to live \"simply.\" He also makes a promise of obedience to the bishop (the church ruler of a local area called a diocese), but the bishop doesn't control every aspect of the secular priest's life the way a religious superior might for a religious order priest. The bishop does decide in what parish (local church) the priest will serve and the priest owes the bishop obedience in matters that pertain to that assignment.\n\nThe other difference is this: members of religious orders make their vows directly to God (in the presence of the Church) whereas secular priests make promises to the Church. It is much easier to receive permission to no longer live according to the promises than the vows.\n\nI'm sure you're a smart 5 year old. :-)", "Just for good measure, how about; reverends, pastors, and ministers. " ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [], [] ]

{ "a_id": [ "cy24tfe", "cy25aap" ], "score": [ 4, 21 ], "text": [ "They make a bill excessively long, minimum 10 pages and sneak a paragraph of what the want somewhere in the pages in the middle.", "Dear Robot, this isn't an anecdote, it's an example to explain to the user how it works. Were a Congressman to put up a 1 line bill that /u/beep-frotz should be shot in a week, the user would mobilise opposition, and persuade people how unjust, offensive, and wrong it is.\n\nWere a Congressman to put up a 200 page bill about the wonders of apple pie, and how the only thing better than apple pie is the incredible US military fighting hard to defend our citizens freedoms, and somewhere 2/3 of the way through, there's a paragraph explaining how termination is necessary & obligatory for users containing a hyphenate, whose second part is 25% longer than the first, which alphabetically precede Congress, and end in the ultimate of Roman alphabetisation, and then I put it up for vote tomorrow - I'm afraid you're dead." ] }

[]

[]

[ [], [] ]